Derrick Henry's chase to the all time rushing record

[Mythos27]

8 hours ago, Callidus said:

Its because its unexpected and with such a small sample size a few big catches skew the shit out of things.

 

Over his career he averages 1.25 catches a game which is nothing. He averages 9.5 yards per catch which is ok. If you add up his longest catch every season its about 1/3 of his career yardage. 

Meaning his normal catch is normaly closer to 6 or 7 yards. 

 

1 catch for 7 yards per game is negligible at best.

 

Even if you want to keep his big ones in there, 1 catch for 9 yards is hardly note worthly...

Now do this for every other RB. The reality is that the overwhelming majority of RBs are not big time contributors in the passing game. Even most RBs infinitely more talented as receivers than Henry don't impact the passing game on a consistent basis. Their main contribution but a large margin it's running the ball. If you remove the truly exceptional guys like McCaffrey and the guys that are glorified slot receivers this is what you generally see. Targets are almost always more efficient when given to receivers. This is generally true but everyone acts like this is unique to Henry because it's one of the few arguments that rings true to people. It's just like how everyone pretends that Henry is the only back in the league that needs a good OL while ignoring what happens to every other back when his line isn't handling business.

[Mythos27]

Just now, rns90 said:

McNichols if you want an actual name.

 

Here’s something then all  the coaches that he has had in the pros (HC and OC) have all taken him off the field on third down.  

also his catches and targets are pretty much all the same .  If he were as adequate as you say there’d be a bigger year reception wise somewhere .

 

I can't argue that coaches haven't seen him the same way you guys do. They have and at least during his time in Tennessee (aside from the first year with Demarco) it was to the team's detriment. Every touch that went to a RB not named Henry (until Spears showed up) was a complete waste. Baltimore actually has guys that are consequentially better in the passing game than Henry so it makes sense they get those touches over him. He's adequate but they're actually very good. Again, I don't think anyone is wrong for saying Henry isn't a great receiver, he's not. The issue is how much it's overblown to use as a cudgel against him. 

[rns90]

1 minute ago, Mythos27 said:

Now do this for every other RB. The reality is that the overwhelming majority of RBs are not big time contributors in the passing game.

The point isn’t that RB aren’t contributors . It’s that he isn’t really a threat at all.  Even if you want to argue that they are just outlet receivers, Henry doesn’t really give you that dimension and it limits the offense because you know you don’t have to account for it.

It only matters when you are trying to compare him to guys who can catch the ball.

 

[rns90]

1 minute ago, Mythos27 said:

He's adequate but they're actually very good. Again, I don't think anyone is wrong for saying Henry isn't a great receiver, he's not. The issue is how much it's overblown to use as a cudgel against him. 

This is more of a question and maybe an observation but I just don’t think he has the skill.

Sometimes on non screen passes unless he catches in stride, he sort of stops and has to start again.  This is related to the discusssion of the build up speed that has been talked about .  That’s probably the best I can explain it.

 

I mean he’s not to be catching and going like other RB.

[Callidus]

41 minutes ago, Mythos27 said:

I can't argue that coaches haven't seen him the same way you guys do. They have and at least during his time in Tennessee (aside from the first year with Demarco) it was to the team's detriment. Every touch that went to a RB not named Henry (until Spears showed up) was a complete waste. Baltimore actually has guys that are consequentially better in the passing game than Henry so it makes sense they get those touches over him. He's adequate but they're actually very good. Again, I don't think anyone is wrong for saying Henry isn't a great receiver, he's not. The issue is how much it's overblown to use as a cudgel against him. 

Henry, 1/3 of his career yardage from biggest play each year. 

 

Bijan 10%

Stevenson 14%

Jones 9%

Montgomery  10%

Achane 7%

 

 

[titanruss]

9 hours ago, Callidus said:

Its because its unexpected and with such a small sample size a few big catches skew the shit out of things.

 

Over his career he averages 1.25 catches a game which is nothing. He averages 9.5 yards per catch which is ok. If you add up his longest catch every season its about 1/3 of his career yardage. 

Meaning his normal catch is normaly closer to 6 or 7 yards. 

 

1 catch for 7 yards per game is negligible at best.

 

Even if you want to keep his big ones in there, 1 catch for 9 yards is hardly note worthly...

we are talking like 8-9 catches per year being the difference between a good receiving back and absolute trash. 
 

it's a silly argument. 
 

the offenses here would have been more effective if he was just left in the field. And  the catch rate being higher than most along with the explosive play chance - just means he need to be accounted for. 
 

His pass blocking is also better

than most 

 

so it goes back to coaches feelings. He doesn't feel like a back to have out there... so let's put a Dion Lewis in to look like a pass catcher but be significantly worse

Edited December 18, 2025 by titanruss

[Jamalisms]

Henry isn't a plus catching the ball and isn't /has never been used in that way, nor as a blocker on 3rd down.

 

How bad you think he is and how much you tout this all as a meaningful offset to his obvious HOF resume is almost exclusively a game TR members play to amuse themselves.

 

Who actually gives a shit? Almost nobody, including most of the people arguing it.

[Callidus]

6 minutes ago, titanruss said:

we are talking g line 8-9 catches per year being the difference between a good receiving g back and absolute trash. 
 

it's a silly argument. 
 

the offense would be more effective if he was just left in the field. And  the catch rate being higher than most just means he need to be accounted for. 
 

His pass blocking is also better

than most 

 

so it goes back to coaches feelings. He doesn't fell like a back to have out there... so let's put a Dion Lewis in to look like a pass catcher but be significantly worse

Someone said is it a volume thing or what on why he had so many big ones. I said volume for sure and did the math.

 

His big plays are by far and away and outsized part of his yardage totals.

Edited December 18, 2025 by Callidus

[titanruss]

1 minute ago, Callidus said:

Someone said is it a volume thing or what on why he had so many big ones. I said volume for sure and did the math.

 

His big plays are by far and away and outsized part of his yardage totals.

sure but he's consistent with them. So more volume is more big play chances. 
 

Hitting more big plays are what separates good from great. They can also certainly be what elevates average to good. 
 

 

[Callidus]

11 minutes ago, titanruss said:

sure but he's consistent with them. So more volume is more big play chances. 
 

Hitting more big plays are what separates good from great. They can also certainly be what elevates average to good. 
 

 

1 20+ yard play every 15 catches is great and all but if your volume is as low as 1.25 per game its nice but not game changing ability. 

 

Could he hit more if he got more touches? Sure. Would he do it as often? Unlikely. The limited catches seem to be a sweet spot for him and thats fine, its just not really part of his game and force feeding him screens wouldn't be a good idea imo. 

[titanruss]

3 hours ago, Callidus said:

1 20+ yard play every 15 catches is great and all but if your volume is as low as 1.25 per game its nice but not game changing ability. 

 

Could he hit more if he got more touches? Sure. Would he do it as often? Unlikely. The limited catches seem to be a sweet spot for him and thats fine, its just not really part of his game and force feeding him screens wouldn't be a good idea imo. 

 

But thats just an untrue exaggeration though. He's closer to a 50 yard reception every 10 and being successful on 4-5 more out of the remaining 9

 

Henry has a 52% success rate on passes for his career. Marshall Faulk only surpassed that mark in 4 /12 seasons. No, before the retards get in here, I'm not saying he's a better receiving back than Faulk. But it should put some perspective on the perception.

 

Anything above 45% is considered good.  Above 50% success rate is considered elite. 

 

Edited December 18, 2025 by titanruss

[Callidus]

1 hour ago, titanruss said:

 

But thats just an untrue exaggeration though. He's closer to a 50 yard reception every 10 and being successful on 4-5 more out of the remaining 9

 

Henry has a 52% success rate on passes for his career. Marshall Faulk only surpassed that mark in 4 /12 seasons. No, before the retards get in here, I'm not saying he's a better receiving back than Faulk. But it should put some perspective on the perception.

 

Anything above 45% is considered good.  Above 50% success rate is considered elite. 

 

I seriously doubt henry has 12 or 13 50+ yard catches.  His longest catch per year only ecipled 50 yards 4 times. 

[OILERMAN]

6 hours ago, rns90 said:

 all  the coaches that he has had in the pros (HC and OC) have all taken him off the field on third down.  

 

Exactly. He doesn't play on passing downs. Why is their a debate? 

 

If he was good in passing situations he would play in passing situations 

[rns90]

2 hours ago, OILERMAN said:

 

Exactly. He doesn't play on passing downs. Why is their a debate? 

 

If he was good in passing situations he would play in passing situations 

I’m not sure .  You got people here arguing that he’s a good pass catcher even though he never plays in passing situations and always gets the same amount of catchers every year.

[titanruss]

4 hours ago, Callidus said:

I seriously doubt henry has 12 or 13 50+ yard catches.  His longest catch per year only ecipled 50 yards 4 times. 

 

Then that hurts your point even more. 

 

His success rate and overall average per catch goes up when he isnt breaking long runs. 

 

His average is 9.5 and success rate is 52%+

So pick your argument. 

Edited December 19, 2025 by titanruss