Would the Texans be nuts for trading Foster midseason?

His first season, 2009, he saw very limited field time. Only 6 games with a mere 54 total attempts. He has only played two full seasons (excluding the three games he missed last season).

You are missing one vital point of my post. How many teams in the league could afford to trade away their best player? Now, given that you will receive at least an equal return, how many teams would WANT to trade away their best player? That's just it; I would guarantee that very, very few of them would do it. A trade is a gamble; hoping your running back stays healthy and effective for years isn't a "gamble", it's a worry. If the running back is already healthy and effective, then there's not really a "gamble", because the nature of the game is to play hard and get tackled.

The fact of the matter is, no one wants to mess with something that works. Foster's merely 25, and due to his exceptional cutting ability doesn't really take a lot of tackle damage. He breaks tackles like legends did. Sure he had an injury, and he fumbled, and he was benched, and blah blah blah. Sure, if you look at every BAD thing that's happened in his career, you could paint a picture akin to Wali Lundy. But he's not Wali Lundy, he's not Ron Dayne, he's not Steve Slaton... he's Arian Foster. A legitimately great running back that is going to tear up the league (hopefully) for years to come. And if you don't believe that's true, well, Foster is still worth the risk. No doubt about it.

 

arian foster is a difference maker and then some. there is a huge advantage to walking into a game with the best player on the field playing on your team. more times than not, that's true about the texans because of arian foster. regardless of position, there is nothing "plug and play" about having a guy like that.

 

The 2nd best player for the Texans was not Mario not even close. Cushing and Jonathan Joseph were irreplaceable last year.

Texans best players going on last years performance alone IMO goes like this.

1.) Foster
2.) Cushing
3.)Duane Brown
4.) Joseph
5.) Andre Johnson
6.) Mario
7.) Schaub
8.) Watt
9.) Smith
10.) Myers

 

What the duck?
The only thing serious about OP is that there is something seriously wrong with their brain.

 

The only assumption that I have seen myself make is that Foster will be great for years to come. Sure, a big assumption, but not an unreasonable one. Your assumption is that there will be a perfect trading field out there in which all of our desirable variables are met. Again, not an unreasonable assumption, BUT, my rebuttal to that is that even if that were the case, I don't think the Texans would even have it on their radar to pursue a trade involving Arian Foster. They just signed him to a very decent and team-friendly contract. Why would they want some other team to reap the benefits of that?

The whole point that I'm trying to drive home is that teams don't just trade away their best player because of fears that he might not be as effective some time in the indeterminable future. That logic is pure over-analysis. As I said, foresight is useless if it ruins everything good that is happening NOW.

 

Yeah, buddy. Arian has played 2 years as a full time starter. Those stats show it is possible to perform at an elite level for another 5 years, which is the length of his new contract. A contract that was signed below market value due to his abnormal by NFL standards non-diva personality.

But yeah.....let's trade him for a draft pick.

 

I can never let my 2-yr see this video. It's totally something he would do to me.

On the OP...

 

Bull****!.....you're an assclown proposing for the Texans to trade their best player or hoping he is useless in 2 years so you can come back and say "I told you so!"

Your fanhood makes Laker fans less pathetic!

 

I guess I take more of the Morey approach and deal him if the right deal presents itself. The price would have to be high (especially if it was an AFC team) but not out of reason. People have given lots of picks for RB's before and if a very nice deal presents itself it would hard to pass up. RB's have the shortest shelf life out of any position and draft picks = cheap talent. Plus, with Tate already being here, are you really losing that much? Tate would've been the starter if he had not gotten injured in preseason over Arian.

 

Yes. Yes they would.

 

Let me get this straight.

We just signed an elite runningback (in my humble opinion, especially after CJ1K's falloff and AP's injury, the best runningback in the NFL) to a very reasonable, long term contract.

Our offense has proven to suffer without him, and his backup has shown himself incapable of filling his role (Tate cannot catch out of the backfield or exploit the ZBS nearly as well).

He has low mileage on his tires, with several years of top performance left in him.

And you want to trade this man?

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/qI0RoJz7Tno?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/qI0RoJz7Tno?version=3&amp;hl=en_US&amp;rel=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" width="560" height="315" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true"></embed></object>

 

Wrong.

Foster was ahead of him in the depth chart in preseason and showed no reason why he should be replaced.

He then went on to put 200+ on the Colts and lead the NFL in rushing.

 

Is it? Kubiak has been here for 6 years (?) and most of those seasons had pretty crappy RBs.

 

Problem is that you very rarely get a great deal in an NFL trade. You just don't get ransoms for superstars like the NBA. Some people are talking how Tate can easily replace him, but Tate himself is apprently worth a 3rd round pick only.