Montee Ball or Eddie Lacy: Which was the best pick?
Alabama Crimson Tide running back Eddie Lacy
John David Mercer-USA TODAY Sports
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.
Wisconsin Badgers running back Montee Ball
Robert Hanashiro-USA TODAY Sports
As Salaz points out, his reasons are these:
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.
Alabama Crimson Tide running back Eddie Lacy
Nelson Chenault-USA TODAY Sports
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:
W | vs | Score | Yds | Att | Y/A | Lg | TD |
Bowl | @ STAN | L 14-20 | 100 | 24 | 4.2 | 0 | 1 |
14 | NEB | W 70-31 | 202 | 21 | 9.6 | 0 | 3 |
13 | @ PENST | L 21-24 | 111 | 27 | 4.1 | 0 | 1 |
12 | OHIST | L 14-21 | 191 | 39 | 4.9 | 0 | 1 |
11 | @ IND | W 62-14 | 198 | 27 | 7.3 | 0 | 3 |
9 | MCHST | L 13-16 | 46 | 22 | 2.1 | 0 | 0 |
8 | MINN | W 38-13 | 166 | 24 | 6.9 | 0 | 2 |
7 | @ PURD | W 38-14 | 247 | 29 | 8.5 | 0 | 3 |
6 | ILL | W 31-14 | 116 | 19 | 6.1 | 0 | 2 |
5 | @ NEB | L 27-30 | 90 | 32 | 2.8 | 0 | 3 |
4 | UTEP | W 37-26 | 40 | 9 | 4.4 | 0 | 1 |
3 | UTAST | W 16-14 | 139 | 37 | 3.8 | 0 | 1 |
2 | @ OREST | L 7-10 | 61 | 15 | 4.1 | 0 | 0 |
1 | NIOWA | W 26-21 | 120 | 32 | 3.8 | 0 | 1 |
Here are the statistics put up by Eddie Lacy over his three-year career at Alabama:
Here are his 2012 stats by game:
W | vs | Score | Yds | Att | Y/A | Lg | TD |
Bowl | @ NOTRE | W 42-14 | 140 | 20 | 7.0 | 0 | 1 |
14 | @ GEO | W 32-28 | 181 | 20 | 9.0 | 0 | 2 |
13 | AUB | W 49-0 | 131 | 18 | 7.3 | 0 | 2 |
12 | WCAR | W 49-0 | 99 | 10 | 9.9 | 0 | 3 |
11 | TXAM | L 24-29 | 92 | 16 | 5.8 | 0 | 1 |
10 | @ LSU | W 21-17 | 89 | 11 | 8.1 | 0 | 1 |
9 | MISST | W 38-7 | 26 | 10 | 2.6 | 0 | 0 |
8 | @ TENN | W 44-13 | 79 | 17 | 4.6 | 0 | 0 |
7 | @ MISOU | W 42-10 | 177 | 18 | 9.8 | 0 | 3 |
5 | MISS | W 33-14 | 82 | 19 | 4.3 | 0 | 0 |
4 | FLATL | W 40-7 | 106 | 15 | 7.1 | 0 | 0 |
3 | @ ARK | W 52-0 | 55 | 12 | 4.6 | 0 | 3 |
2 | WKEN | W 35-0 | 36 | 9 | 4.0 | 0 | 0 |
1 | MICH | W 41-14 | 35 | 9 | 3.9 | 0 | 1 |