On Running Backs

[Big Blitz]

Absolutely can’t disagree with a lot of this.  

 

 

 

 

 

However, what the “analytics” are doing is defending analytics - we get it - OVER TIME the math says blah blah….

 

But these numbers can’t quantify:

 

1.  that CMC saved the 49ers season.  
2. RBs don’t matter but Singletary wasn’t good enough and we went looking for RB help

3. Fournette is a major reason why the Bucs won the SB

4. The Chiefs made the “grave mistake” of taking a RB in the first round - a horrible use of a pick - but still won the Super Bowl albeit a year later and with another RB - but the pick didn’t hurt them. 
5. Saquan Barkley carried the Giants to the playoffs.  He was a first round pick.  
 

 

We are over thinking RBs.  Basically everyone wants a good one but doesn’t want to pay in draft capital or money.  
 

The argument in his tweets is that circumstance determines a RBs success.  I mean sure - but some RBs are elite some are good some are meh and some stink.  Essentially argues for “it doesn’t matter your RB.”  
 

It’s ridiculous.  

 

If you had a do over - Breece Hall or Elam?  Trade for CMC?  Not really looking to debate that for the 100th time I’m just making a point.  
 

 

I think the injury risk is the problem.  You know they’ll miss time.  I don’t think that should dissuade you from picking them high.   

 

It just depends on the team and where - say the Bears take Bijan at 9 - dumb.  
 

The Cowboys at 26?  I think that’s a great spot and pick.  

 

The future of the RB position is going to be interesting.  

Edited April 22, 2023 by Big Blitz

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

17 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

 

If you had a do over - Breece Hall or Elam?  Trade for CMC?  Not really looking to debate that for the 100th time I’m just making a point.  
 

 

Elam 10 times out of 10. It's irrelevant if Hall is a top 5 RB and Elam a bust. You have to draft the position that has more value. 

 

I really don't think any of your five points are all that true

[Big Blitz]

5 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

Elam 10 times out of 10. It's irrelevant if Hall is a top 5 RB and Elam a bust. You have to draft the position that has more value. 

 

I really don't think any of your five points are all that true

 

First I like Elam and think he’s going to be good.  How good idk.  
 

But we drafted (traded up to do so) a RB in RD 2 anyway. 

 

Then we drafted a CB later that started over Elam. 
 

So that argument makes zero sense to me - and It was a late first round pick not top 10. 

 

 

I thought very highly if Hall and with the Jets he looked like he was headed toward OROY.  

 

I don’t understand drafting the RB in RD 2 was fine but if we held at what was it - 25? picking an RB there (in this case the first and likely the best one) not a good value?  
 

That’s poor evaluation imo and I think it’s because of sticking hard and fast to these “value” rules.   

[John from Riverside]

Good thing we’re not in the top 20

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

20 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

I don’t understand drafting the RB in RD 2 was fine but if we held at what was it - 25? picking an RB there (in this case the first and likely the best one) not a good value?  

 

You don't understand because I never said it. Drafting a RB in round #2 given the teams needs was also foolish. Beane has drafted three RB's since 2019 on day two. At the very most we should have used a single day two pick on a RB in the last four drafts. Instead, we used three picks on RB's in those rounds over that time span. 

 

Chiefs got their super bowl winning RB in the seventh round. 

[Buffalo Junction]

21 minutes ago, Big Blitz said:

 

First I like Elam and think he’s going to be good.  How good idk.  
 

But we drafted (traded up to do so) a RB in RD 2 anyway. 

 

Then we drafted a CB later that started over Elam. 
 

So that argument makes zero sense to me - and It was a late first round pick not top 10. 

 

 

I thought very highly if Hall and with the Jets he looked like he was headed toward OROY.  

 

I don’t understand drafting the RB in RD 2 was fine but if we held at what was it - 25? picking an RB there (in this case the first and likely the best one) not a good value?  
 

That’s poor evaluation imo and I think it’s because of sticking hard and fast to these “value” rules.   

Top end running backs have value on their rookie contract. The issue is that their value generally deteriorates before a second contract. In contrast, if you hit on a QB you have a 15-20 year starter, LT, WR or DE you have a 10-15 year starter, CB or DT it’s 7-12 years. RBs are done by 27-30 y/o in the modern era unless they’re Frank Gore, AD or a rotational player. Look at the Packers…. As amazing as Aaron Jones is they drafted a hammer (Dillon) to take a bunch of the tough carries off his plate and extend his value. It’s a viable option in a run heavy offense, but not ideal unless you have QB, LT, RT, DE, WR and CB set which that team does. The Eagles are in a similar boat. This team still needs a DE to take over after Von, a RT to establish consistency, same with guard, WR, MLB…. Getting a hammer in a later round to extend Cooks value is a better plan than getting a top back with a premium pick that could solidify more critical positions with better long term value. Heck, a rookie that can play guard for a year or two before sliding to center when Morse leaves might be a better use of early assets. I love great running backs because they’re fun to watch and draw secondary assets into the box, but they’re limited when the Oline can’t block, WRs aren’t separating, and the defense can’t get a stop. 

18 minutes ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

You don't understand because I never said it. Drafting a RB in round #2 given the teams needs was also foolish. Beane has drafted three RB's since 2019 on day two. At the very most we should have used a single day two pick on a RB in the last four drafts. Instead, we used three picks on RB's in those rounds over that time span. 

 

Chiefs got their super bowl winning RB in the seventh round. 

Given Beane’s track record in round two I’m just glad that Cook looks like a hit instead of a miss. 🤷‍♂️ 

[Richard Noggin]

2 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

But these numbers can’t quantify:

 

1.  that CMC saved the 49ers season.  
2. RBs don’t matter but Singletary wasn’t good enough and we went looking for RB help

3. Fournette is a major reason why the Bucs won the SB

4. The Chiefs made the “grave mistake” of taking a RB in the first round - a horrible use of a pick - but still won the Super Bowl albeit a year later and with another RB - but the pick didn’t hurt them. 
5. Saquan Barkley carried the Giants to the playoffs.  He was a first round pick.  
 

 

We are over thinking RBs.  Basically everyone wants a good one but doesn’t want to pay in draft capital or money.  
 

The argument in his tweets is that circumstance determines a RBs success.  I mean sure - but some RBs are elite some are good some are meh and some stink.  Essentially argues for “it doesn’t matter your RB.”  
 

It’s ridiculous.  

 

If you had a do over - Breece Hall or Elam?  Trade for CMC?  Not really looking to debate that for the 100th time I’m just making a point.  
 

I think the injury risk is the problem.  You know they’ll miss time.  I don’t think that should dissuade you from picking them high.   

 

It just depends on the team and where - say the Bears take Bijan at 9 - dumb.  
 

The Cowboys at 26?  I think that’s a great spot and pick.  
 

The future of the RB position is going to be interesting.  

 

Your numbered points that can't be quantified are all VERY debatable with respect to accuracy (1-4) and/or relevance (5). It's all so incredibly complicated and subjective. And even so, I could probably dig up or generate quantified assessments either challenging or supporting each point. 

 

What I've bolded in your post speaks to the fundamental flaw here: you're both weighing in on the RB value debate AND discouraging further debate. Kind of all over the place.

[Doc Brown]

That was the best laid out argument about drafting a running back early that I've seen reading through that whole thread.  It's so persuasive that I wouldn't want to take Robinson even if he fell to us at #27.  

 

I'm actively rooting for a team to draft Robinson and Gibbs before us so that prospects at positions that can significantly move the needle fall farther down the board to us at #27.

[freddyjj]

2 hours ago, Doc Brown said:

 

I'm actively rooting for a team to draft Robinson and Gibbs before us so that prospects at positions that can significantly move the needle fall farther down the board to us at #27.

And cuz I can't spell their first names. 

[Bookie Man]

I think we’ll start seeing more and more WR/RB hybrid players. Cordarelle Patterson and Deebo Samuel type players. 

[NastyNateSoldiers]

7 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

Absolutely can’t disagree with a lot of this.  

 

 

 

 

 

However, what the “analytics” are doing is defending analytics - we get it - OVER TIME the math says blah blah….

 

But these numbers can’t quantify:

 

1.  that CMC saved the 49ers season.  
2. RBs don’t matter but Singletary wasn’t good enough and we went looking for RB help

3. Fournette is a major reason why the Bucs won the SB

4. The Chiefs made the “grave mistake” of taking a RB in the first round - a horrible use of a pick - but still won the Super Bowl albeit a year later and with another RB - but the pick didn’t hurt them. 
5. Saquan Barkley carried the Giants to the playoffs.  He was a first round pick.  
 

 

We are over thinking RBs.  Basically everyone wants a good one but doesn’t want to pay in draft capital or money.  
 

The argument in his tweets is that circumstance determines a RBs success.  I mean sure - but some RBs are elite some are good some are meh and some stink.  Essentially argues for “it doesn’t matter your RB.”  
 

It’s ridiculous.  

 

If you had a do over - Breece Hall or Elam?  Trade for CMC?  Not really looking to debate that for the 100th time I’m just making a point.  
 

 

I think the injury risk is the problem.  You know they’ll miss time.  I don’t think that should dissuade you from picking them high.   

 

It just depends on the team and where - say the Bears take Bijan at 9 - dumb.  
 

The Cowboys at 26?  I think that’s a great spot and pick.  

 

The future of the RB position is going to be interesting.  

I know one thing for sure not all YPC are equal if u average 4.4 yds per carry facing 8man boxes and another RB does it predominantly with light 6man boxes are those 2 RBs equal ? 
 

This is another thing analytics don’t account for is offensive balance yeah u can try to pass on every single play but without the threat of the run pass rushers will tee off and secondary players will get a feel for what your doing. The Steelers tried this concept of throwing the ball 50+ times per game a few yrs back but it didn’t help them in the later part of the season as they were figured out and although they started that season 12-0 I believe they didn’t get past the wildcard round . 

[Playoffs?]

7 hours ago, Sammy Watkins' Rib said:

 

Elam 10 times out of 10. It's irrelevant if Hall is a top 5 RB and Elam a bust. You have to draft the position that has more value. 

 

I really don't think any of your five points are all that true

I don’t understand this, or may be missing something so forgive me… but how can you ultimately determine value until you’ve seen them both play?  Hindsight is 20/20, but I see Breece Hall as a game changer (he was for the Jets before he went down), and Elam barely saw the field. Why does Elam have more value?  
 

Or are you just saying the CB position has more value than the RB position?  
 

I look at players individually. You take the player that gives you the best chance to win games. At this point, I feel Breece Hall would give Buffalo a better chance to win over Elam… but then again, I don’t know who plays CB if it’s not Elam.

[Buffalo03]

Draft Bijan if he's there. Idgaf

[NastyNateSoldiers]

6 hours ago, Buffalo Junction said:

Top end running backs have value on their rookie contract. The issue is that their value generally deteriorates before a second contract. In contrast, if you hit on a QB you have a 15-20 year starter, LT, WR or DE you have a 10-15 year starter, CB or DT it’s 7-12 years. RBs are done by 27-30 y/o in the modern era unless they’re Frank Gore, AD or a rotational player. Look at the Packers…. As amazing as Aaron Jones is they drafted a hammer (Dillon) to take a bunch of the tough carries off his plate and extend his value. It’s a viable option in a run heavy offense, but not ideal unless you have QB, LT, RT, DE, WR and CB set which that team does. The Eagles are in a similar boat. This team still needs a DE to take over after Von, a RT to establish consistency, same with guard, WR, MLB…. Getting a hammer in a later round to extend Cooks value is a better plan than getting a top back with a premium pick that could solidify more critical positions with better long term value. Heck, a rookie that can play guard for a year or two before sliding to center when Morse leaves might be a better use of early assets. I love great running backs because they’re fun to watch and draw secondary assets into the box, but they’re limited when the Oline can’t block, WRs aren’t separating, and the defense can’t get a stop. 

Given Beane’s track record in round two I’m just glad that Cook looks like a hit instead of a miss. 🤷‍♂️ 

All teams have needs the Chiefs won the Super Bowl with one of the worst Wr cores in Super Bowl history . If u really want to get down to it it’s the QB and the trenches that make the biggest difference in the NFL and if u just look at the Super Bowl winning teams u will see that .  The most common denominator of winning Superbowls are great QBs and Lines play.
 

1st rd Wrs hardly ever win the Superbowl even in this modern day game the Wrs that have won are usually later rd pks like Tyreek Hill or Cooper Kupp . Mof since 2008 there’s only been a few 1st rd Wrs that won the Super Bowl Mike Evans with Tampa and Demariyus Thomas but that Bronco team didn’t win because of there passing game Peyton was a shell of himself.  I know u got all these needs listed but what we really are missing is Superstar talent and that’s across the board not just at a few positions. 

[WhoTom]

You know the phrase "Money can't buy happiness." Well, that's true, but poverty can impede happiness.

 

In the same vein, a good running game probably won't win a SB, but a lousy running game will decrease the odds of doing so.

 

 

[Ed_Formerly_of_Roch]

To me this is the problem with taking a RB in round 1.   This also tell me if the averages are so low for RB, it likely means that even the ones that do make it to a 2nd contract, never play to see the end of it, so no have all this dead cap.  Add to that using a 1st round pick on a player that has the shortest career length doesn't seem to make much sense to me.

 

[flmike]

I'm still of the opinion that great RBs have great OLs. Without an excellent blocking OL and scheme, even the best RBs hit LBs in the gaps. I believe Cook will be a solid RB if we can build a proper OL that manhandle DLs late in the season in bad weather. We used to have that and it worked. I prefer to use our 1st round (if we stay at current pick) on an OL or maybe WR (we have a lot of needs). If they grab a stunning CB (although I don't think there are any in this draft that will fall to us) that's fine, but OL is really the biggest need. Josh has always papered over their weakness with his mobility. 

[die hard bills fan]

Didn't read the whole content but to me, this analysis is incomplete regarding a player's worth in winning games.   The running game is not as important as it once was but is still needed and a player's worth should be tailored to a team's need. This argument should be extrapolated to every other position as well.  How important is drafting a day 1  vs later round WR, TE, CB, DE, OL on winning games?  How important are special teams, turnovers, injuries, weather, etc involved in a game when comparing rushing data?   There are too many variables to look at besides just a running back's production and draft position.

[Malazan]

9 hours ago, Big Blitz said:

We are over thinking RBs.  Basically everyone wants a good one but doesn’t want to pay in draft capital or money.  

 

A nugget that may or may not support this.. The last five Superbowls.. 9 of 10 teams had a running back that was drafted in the first 2 rounds (although it may not have been by them)

[Sammy Watkins' Rib]

1 hour ago, Playoffs? said:

I don’t understand this, or may be missing something so forgive me… but how can you ultimately determine value until you’ve seen them both play?  Hindsight is 20/20, but I see Breece Hall as a game changer (he was for the Jets before he went down), and Elam barely saw the field. Why does Elam have more value?  
 

Or are you just saying the CB position has more value than the RB position?  
 

I look at players individually. You take the player that gives you the best chance to win games. At this point, I feel Breece Hall would give Buffalo a better chance to win over Elam… but then again, I don’t know who plays CB if it’s not Elam.

yes CB has more value .

 

obviously if Elam busts and we can use hindsight then give me Hall. I’ll take anyone over a bust. But we can’t use hindsight when we are turning in a pick card at the draft. 
 

CB over RB in round one will always be  the smart choice. As I said I seldom want to take a RB in rounds two and three as well. Our  GM has used three of those picks in the last four drafts on RB’s. I think that has been one of his biggest a mistakes in building this roster.