Does Booker Add Anything?

We're at that point in the offseason where every year we all try to convince ourselves that this will be the year the Eagles change the way they use their running backs.  We've all pretty much given up on having them run the ball more, which then leads to the next point -- using more than one of them at the same time.

We do this every single year.  New guy comes in, we talk about how the Eagles could create some mismatches by using them both at the same time ... then nothing changes, Westbrook carries the whole load, and the other guys only come out when Brian needs a breather.

Which is why I'm having a hard time believing that Lorenzo Booker is going to make this big an impact this year:

And the running backs -- all of them -- are going to be front and center in the equation. We don't know how many halfbacks the Eagles will keep -- Tony Hunt and Ryan Moats are still very definitely in the big picture right now. In one vision, the offense goes through the backs. How many times in a game will Westbrook and Booker play at the same time and force the defense to shift where it doesn't want to go?

Talk all you want about McNabb, or about the wide receivers and debate how effective this offense is going to be. Me, I'm staring at what could be a special situation at halfback.  

Let's look at the history there.  Have the Eagles at any point in the last few seasons really used two halfbacks at the same time as anything more than a gimmick?  Moats?  Nope.  Hunt?  Nope.  Buckhalter, the one guy they actually trust to put out there?  Rarely. 

It's gotten to the point where the Eagles so seldomly go to something like a split back formation that when they do it down near the end zone, the whole defense starts screaming: "Shovel shovel shovel!"

But maybe this is the year that changes.  What if the Eagles do decide to put Westbrook and Booker out there at the same time?  Well then someone else has to sit down.  And that someone else is going to be L.J. Smith, one of the receivers, or whoever wins the starting fullback job. 

You have to think that if it's the fullback, ok, that's an advantage in the passing game.  Although it does cut down on the number of blockers in the running game.  If it's L.J., maybe that's a net plus.  We'll just have to see how Booker compares to a finally-healthy-again Smith.  And if it's one of the receivers, well then either Booker is out of position -- if he lines up outside -- or we're talking about subbing him in for the #3 guy, whom we all hope at some point will be the explosive DeSean Jackson.  Not sure that's an advantage in either situation. 

So IF Booker plays at the same time as Westbrook and IF he's actually able to handle the blitz pickup responsibility that Buckhalter is so good at and IF he can function as a better receiver than LJ or DeSean, then maybe there's some net benefit there.  But it's hard to see it being that huge.

Of course, the other way Booker can get on the field is if Westbrook is on the sidelines.  But then he's not really adding anything, he's just replacing Westbrook's production.  And if Lorenzo isn't really much of a threat as a runner, how great is it having him out there?  Even if you're just going to use him as a pass-catcher, you're still looking at a significant dropoff from Westbrook not being in the game.

And if Westbrook gets hurt, God help us all, but most of all Donovan McNabb, who's going to be facing blitzes on 80 percent of the snaps each game.

All of which is to say that if Booker can play well enough to take a few touches a game away from Westbrook to try to keep the big guy fresh/healthy, then he's doing his job.  Anything beyond that is gravy.

Comments

[Ajay]

What I find amusing is that I didn't even have to look at the link to know Spadaro wrote that article on RBs. His tone never changes, and he thinks the Eagles have a lot of "special situations" at various positions. I used to read his articles pretty regularly, (mostly because I try to read everything available on the Eagles), but now I just come here. Thanks Derek for sifting out the intersting stuff from the fluff.

I think Booker seeing time has something to do with Reid's notion of "putting guys in the right position to make plays." I think this philosophy is a large part of why a lot of rookies don't see much of the field - regardless of how well they know how to pick up the blitz (in the case of RB). Now granted Tony Hunt may not have been ready last year, but there were definitely several instances when Buck got planted by a DE.

Anyway, where I'm going with this is that I think Booker has an advantage in the fact that while he's a rookie in the Eagles system, he's not a rookie to the NFL. So experience wise he has a head start as far as Andy is concerned.

To your points about Hunt and Moats. When Moats was drafted, size, speed and shiftiness were all in his favor. He couldn't quite get rid of his fumblitis, both in training camp as well as on the field. He had 2 fumbles in 55 carries in 2005, compared to Westbrook's 2 fumbles in his entire rushing career. Of course, Moats doesn't have a lot of data to draw from, but I'm guessing the coaches hadn't seen enough for them to trust him. Hunt, I don't know much about in terms of how he fits in with the Eagles. From friends who watched his PSU career more closely, I gathered that he was successful in college not because he was fast or shifty, but more because he was big enough to run through people. I think it might be taking him longer than expected to develop the necessary skills to make it in the pros. I hope he does, because we can still dream about the three headed monster again.

And let me take a stab at what I think might have happened to Buck. This is pure speculation with minimal references to any actual stats, but it seems he must have lost some of his athletic ability. In 2001 and 2003, he had long runs of 48 and 64 yards, but has not topped 30 since coming back. One interesting stat is his 8 TDs in 2003 - somehow he was being used effectively at the goalline back then. It would be good to probe that a bit and see what was going on, and whether the Eagles moved away from that approach either because it was stale or they no longer have the personnel. Buck's carries went down significantly from before his injuries, but this probably has a lot to do with the greatness of Westbrook.

[Me]

I think a misconception many people who didn't want Hunt in college have is thinking he's a "bowling ball" type of back. He's not an he never has been.

What he is is a fantastic between the tackles runner, with great patience and an unwillingness to go down on first contact.

For teams that focus on maintaining a power running attack, I have no doubt Hunt could be a legitimate 1 or 1A guy. On the Eagles, with their more opportunistic approach to running the ball, his best and most obvious role is as a late-game closer.

Get a lead, then shorten the game and protect the QB's health by pounding the other guys into submission.

For that happen, though, Hunt's going to need to show up as a major contributor on special teams this year -- so he can dress -- and the Eagles actually need to generate some leads...