When Hall of Fame-bound former Green Bay Packers linebacker Dave Robinson announced the franchise’s second round selection of Eddie Lacy last Friday, there were many who felt the pick should have been Wisconsin alum and favorite Montee Ball.
But Packers fans soon realized that Ted Thompson had once again locked in a player who was considered one of the best at his position – and probably a better value at the 61st spot than was Ball, who was selected with the 58th pick by the Denver Broncos.
So, which team got the better of the deal – Packers or Broncos.
Well, if you’re the Broncos, who came out like the Steelers and raised the injury issues with Lacy, Ball was the better deal. If you also ask Vincent Salaz, the author of a piece on the subject over at predominantlyorange.com, Ball was by far the better pick.
As Salaz points out, his reasons are these:
• Lacy ran behind what was widely regarded as the best O-Line in the NCAA and was still not as productive as Montee (who also ran behind a stellar line, but was still able to produce more.)
• One thing I love about him is that this kid loves Terelle Davis. He grew up idolizing him and modeling his game after him. He runs a lot like TD did and I’m sure that that was at least a small factor in the decision making process.
• Montee has just about the most beautiful one-cut move I’ve ever seen. If you take a look at the 3:09 mark in this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=vk7aLzbwBb8 You’ll see exactly what I’m talking about.
• The kid has about the best vision of any player in this draft which is great on its own, but he also has the football IQ to know how to use it which will make his transition into the NFL much easier.
• Lacy was unable to improve his stock at his pro day after not being able to work out at the combine. Ball on the other hand (who blamed his ‘poor’ combine numbers on a sinus infection) Posted better numbers in every single exercise. The most tangible of which for most is the 40. At his pro day he posted between 4.43 and 4.49 depending on where you read. Can’t tell me that’s not some top end speed.
• Last but not least, the kid is smart, well spoken, very articulate and hard working. The Denver bronco organization likes people that fall under those categories.
It’s great that Ball is smart, well spoken, articulate and hard-working – in fact anyone who has followed Wisconsin football as most Packers have – we knew that already.
What we’re interested in is what the statistics say.
As a word of caution, statistics don’t tell the entire story and can be deceiving – like comparing apples to oranges – but they do illustrate the amount of success each of these player have had in their college careers. However, how that translates into success at the next level is difficult to measure.
In my opinion, both of these players will see success in 2013, but what might give Lacy an advantage, in my opinion, is that the Packers also drafted a guy by the name of Johnathan Franklin out of UCLA.
Franklin, who also runs hard between the tackles, can also provide, like DuJuan Harris, a different look than Lacy will bring to the field. The “Thunder and Lighting” look could give the Packers the most dynamic backfield tandem in years, maybe decades.
But in the meantime, we will let the statistics speak for themselves. At first blush, Hall holds the advantage in sheer numbers, but again, how that translates into success in the NFL remains to be seen.
You be the judge. Who got the better pick?
So here’s a look at Montee Ball’s stats over four years with the Badgers:
Here are Ball’s statistics by game in 2012:
|Bowl||@ STAN||L 14-20||100||24||4.2||0||1|
|13||@ PENST||L 21-24||111||27||4.1||0||1|
|11||@ IND||W 62-14||198||27||7.3||0||3|
|7||@ PURD||W 38-14||247||29||8.5||0||3|
|5||@ NEB||L 27-30||90||32||2.8||0||3|
|2||@ OREST||L 7-10||61||15||4.1||0||0|
|Bowl||@ NOTRE||W 42-14||140||20||7.0||0||1|
|14||@ GEO||W 32-28||181||20||9.0||0||2|
|10||@ LSU||W 21-17||89||11||8.1||0||1|
|8||@ TENN||W 44-13||79||17||4.6||0||0|
|7||@ MISOU||W 42-10||177||18||9.8||0||3|
|3||@ ARK||W 52-0||55||12||4.6||0||3|