RB Todd Gurley is profiled on "Path to the Draft" tonight

[Il Mostro]

Does it worry anyone that Nick Chubb was actually better than Gurley?

 

 

True dat.   Gurly will still go somewhere in the 1st even if drafting RB's with knee injuries is a total crap shoot.   Some guys, like Frank Gore, work out fine.  Then there are the Marcus Lattimore's who never see the field. 

[T0mShane]

I just watched ESPN Insiders and NFL Live and as expected Mel Kiper and Chris Mortensen think Gurley would be a luxury pick unless the thought is to run him to take pressure off of our weak QBs. That is the reason for my post and when I heard on NFL AM, @ 6am, that Gurley will be on Path to the Draft tonight, I sent it will enjoying my morning coffee. I was planning this for next week originally. Coincidently it got legs in the media today from McShay . But, I still would make this pick.

are you illuminati

[ManCave Analyst]

In my own dysfunctional mind. But, I did sleep at a Holiday Inn last night.

[ManCave Analyst]

Just want to say that I love Gurley as a prospect, but the injury aspects scare me.   He injured his ACL with very little contact and he missed a few games in 2013.  Anyone can get injured once, but once there are two significant injuries, you become injury prone in my mind.

 

Would not take him in the first round because of it.

[D/quote]Komba , do you know if this was the same knee being reinjured ?

[Jet Life]

Chris Mortensen just now: "I'm interested you put Gurley at 6 because I've talked to executives in the last week that feel he's the 2nd best player in the draft, and the best running back to enter the draft since Adrian Peterson."

[kmnj]

gulp- it scares me but for our team I would take him-we have two weapons on the outside-our qb will be suspect at best-our defense should be great-double gulp we might be able to win vs most teams grounding and pounding(marshall's head will explode though) -in a perfect world flip our pick for brees(I know it wont happen) or flip it for Rivers

[JetBlue]

I can't disagree with that either.  I would love a QB to lead our Team , just don't see it. And I know we need an impact OT  and OLB who can rush, tackle,  and drop in coverage. , I like that you watch games and provide good info. Hopefully , someone else here will step up and give a good opinion on some of our prospects, too.

I suggest you visit the Draft Forum if you haven't done so already. There is ton of threads about draft prospects the Jets might draft, mock drafts etc.

[ManCave Analyst]

Thx, I haven't yet. But I will check it out.

[Shadetree]

Does it worry anyone that Nick Chubb was actually better than Gurley?

Yup...Chubb was a beast and Georgia didnt miss a beat. I'm not a fan of Gurley at 6.

Full disclosure..when we were looking for a new HC, I was banging the table for a Kubiak-Gurley combo, so I do like Gurley...a lot . I just can't imagine RB that high when well have our choice of edge defenders or maybe cooper still available.

#inexactscience

[Clementi49]

I would be extremely happy with Gurley. Also, Cooper. White. Any sort of impact offensive player.

Gurley paired with one of those other tier QBs. Totally for that. We need to improve the offense not defense.

[JETSfaninNE]

After watching game changers there is something I really like about Ajayi.  I'm hoping we can grab him in 2nd or 3rd.

 

Not sure how I feel about taking a RB that high, especially one that has already had ACL surgery.  Very risky at pick 6.

 

I'd prefer Cooper myself, not completely sold on White so far I'd be looking closely at Parker though.

 

I wasn't sure about wanting Shane Ray or Vic Beasley at 6 either but I'm warming up to the idea just b/c I think we have some flexibility with time for a young pass rusher to come in and have Kacey Rogers develop them into a beast.

[Sperm Edwards]

Like Revis..

I'm pretty sure the Jets brought Revis in. Remembering something about a story how they picked him up from the airport in a limo and how he was even nice and respectful to the driver.

Even if they didn't it's still not the same. We would be hoping he'd drop and/or no one else would move up (so we'd be able to). There's no need for such a smokescreen with Girlie since we pick so high and he's a RB.

[papz187]

He could be great but I'd still be pissed if we took him. You can win with JAG RBs. Though of course maybe that trend will change at some point. But right now it feels like RB is a waste of a high draft pick (even if it's for a young AP). A good OL (and Scherff will be available) is a better option to build a strong running game. Though I don't necessarily want Scherff at #6 either (though wouldn't hate it). I really want one of the 2 QBs or else Amari Cooper (who prob won't be available). Glad we got that meaningless win against the fish week 17!

Yeah I agree. Even though I don't want Scherff at 6 either, I'd much rather build my run game around my OLine (like our 09 team or Dallas of last year) than around a Beast RB like Minnesota a couple years ago.

I'm not oppose to having a top tier RB, I just prioritize offensive line play over running back. If we traded back with a team like the Saints or Browns and could get Gurley and a top Lineman I would be fine with that, although I'm really hoping Cooper falls to 6, he's my top choice. Also would be ecstatic with a top tier pass rusher.

Sent from my SGH-M919 using Tapatalk

[derp]

I get that Gurley is really talented. But even if he's the next Adrian Peterson on the field, which is basically best case scenario, what have the Vikings won with Peterson?

And that's in the good scenario, look how spending first round picks on backs has worked out for teams recently. Trent Richardson, Doug Martin, David Wilson, Mark Ingram, CJ Spiller, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, Knowshon Moreno, Donald Brown, Beanie Wells, Darren McFadden, Jonathan Stewart, Felix Jones, Rashard Mendenhall, and Chris Johnson. Not a good list, and that's all of them drafted in the first since 2008.

Plus you get to a second contract with running backs and have to pay them absurd money while other teams are getting slightly less production for literally a quarter of the cost and less long-term commitment.

[HOZ THE JET]

Gurley at 6 is interesting, just thinking about how he impacts our offense especially with Geno at QB I would say this I would be kind of upset but when the season start I can see a lot of ppl saying he is a potential rookie of the yr same like Sheldon Richardson

[#27TheDominator]

I get that Gurley is really talented. But even if he's the next Adrian Peterson on the field, which is basically best case scenario, what have the Vikings won with Peterson?

And that's in the good scenario, look how spending first round picks on backs has worked out for teams recently. Trent Richardson, Doug Martin, David Wilson, Mark Ingram, CJ Spiller, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, Knowshon Moreno, Donald Brown, Beanie Wells, Darren McFadden, Jonathan Stewart, Felix Jones, Rashard Mendenhall, and Chris Johnson. Not a good list, and that's all of them drafted in the first since 2008.

Plus you get to a second contract with running backs and have to pay them absurd money while other teams are getting slightly less production for literally a quarter of the cost and less long-term commitment.

 

I understand the draft pick as a valuable commodity argument, but not the second contract argument.  Nobody holds a gun to your head and makes you pay the RB on his second contract.  Plus, if RB is so plug and play and used up so fast, I can see some point in just using the pick up.  Run the kid into the ground and draft another.

[Dcat]

I get that Gurley is really talented. But even if he's the next Adrian Peterson on the field, which is basically best case scenario, what have the Vikings won with Peterson?

And that's in the good scenario, look how spending first round picks on backs has worked out for teams recently. Trent Richardson, Doug Martin, David Wilson, Mark Ingram, CJ Spiller, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, Knowshon Moreno, Donald Brown, Beanie Wells, Darren McFadden, Jonathan Stewart, Felix Jones, Rashard Mendenhall, and Chris Johnson. Not a good list, and that's all of them drafted in the first since 2008.

Plus you get to a second contract with running backs and have to pay them absurd money while other teams are getting slightly less production for literally a quarter of the cost and less long-term commitment.

 

^This

[Bruce Harper]

Says you.  If he isn't he seems to be damn close.

 

I seem to recall that a lot of people thought that Richardson was on Peterson's level too.  We'd better be damned sure if we take him that high.

[FTL Jet Fan]

Cooper or White at 6. I just don't feel comfortable taking a RB coming off a knee injury at 6.

[ManCave Analyst]

I like Cooper ( route running and hands ) and White ( potential ) too. You have to draft for Quality early and find a place to make it fit long term when you pick #6.

[derp]

I understand the draft pick as a valuable commodity argument, but not the second contract argument.  Nobody holds a gun to your head and makes you pay the RB on his second contract.  Plus, if RB is so plug and play and used up so fast, I can see some point in just using the pick up.  Run the kid into the ground and draft another.

 

I guess my follow up would be, why are you drafting a guy at #6 overall if you're only planning to have him for one contract? The pick, at least in my opinion, should be used to select somebody the franchise feels can be a long-term building block.

 

The flip side is what your goals are I guess. Is the goal to become a championship caliber team in the long run or be better for the next few years? If the Jets feel they're good enough that Gurley is that last piece to a championship caliber team, then by all means. But I think they're farther away than that given the quarterback situation, and probably won't be there while he's on his first contract. So if I'm in Maccagnan's shoes I want somebody who I'll want to give a second contract, because short of a shocking QB upgrade I don't think we'll be a championship caliber team during the first round pick's first contract.

 

I can kind of see why teams have tried to draft running backs late in the first round. If you have a good, competitive football team and you want to win in the playoffs, running the ball is important. Backs tend to be able to make immediate impacts and, if you don't have one, maybe drafting a stud there puts you over the top. It hasn't worked out, but I get it in theory. Top ten not as much and most backs drafted in the top ten have busted anyway.

[#27TheDominator]

I guess my follow up would be, why are you drafting a guy at #6 overall if you're only planning to have him for one contract? The pick, at least in my opinion, should be used to select somebody the franchise feels can be a long-term building block.

 

The flip side is what your goals are I guess. Is the goal to become a championship caliber team in the long run or be better for the next few years? If the Jets feel they're good enough that Gurley is that last piece to a championship caliber team, then by all means. But I think they're farther away than that given the quarterback situation, and probably won't be there while he's on his first contract. So if I'm in Maccagnan's shoes I want somebody who I'll want to give a second contract, because short of a shocking QB upgrade I don't think we'll be a championship caliber team during the first round pick's first contract.

 

I can kind of see why teams have tried to draft running backs late in the first round. If you have a good, competitive football team and you want to win in the playoffs, running the ball is important. Backs tend to be able to make immediate impacts and, if you don't have one, maybe drafting a stud there puts you over the top. It hasn't worked out, but I get it in theory. Top ten not as much and most backs drafted in the top ten have busted anyway.

 

 

Good points.

 

I tend not to think that way.  I look at players by contract.  When the contract is up, it is up and I don't see our FAs any differently than anybody else's.  Doesn't matter to me if we drafted Revis or not. Sign Wilkerson if you can get a discount or because you need the asset locked up.  QB is a spot you have to draft because the good ones get locked up.  Wilson, Flacco and even Andy Dalton already got significant deals. For RB or WR it is a bit different.

[Paradis]

I get that Gurley is really talented. But even if he's the next Adrian Peterson on the field, which is basically best case scenario, what have the Vikings won with Peterson?

And that's in the good scenario, look how spending first round picks on backs has worked out for teams recently. Trent Richardson, Doug Martin, David Wilson, Mark Ingram, CJ Spiller, Ryan Mathews, Jahvid Best, Knowshon Moreno, Donald Brown, Beanie Wells, Darren McFadden, Jonathan Stewart, Felix Jones, Rashard Mendenhall, and Chris Johnson. Not a good list, and that's all of them drafted in the first since 2008.

 

 

 

This is a classic sh*tty argument... is it true? kind of... but you can say that about virtually any round. List all the running backs taken in round 2, or 3 or 4 and you can make the same assessment. It doesn't matter what round you're talking about. Yes, there's a handful of a Arian Fosters out there who remind us that gems exist in the UDFA world... but the bulk of the major players today and yesterday, and tomorrow, are RBs taken in rounds 1-2

[Komba]

This is a classic sh*tty argument... is it true? kind of... but you can say that about virtually any round. List all the running backs taken in round 2, or 3 or 4 and you can make the same assessment. It doesn't matter what round you're talking about. Yes, there's a handful of a Arian Fosters out there who remind us that gems exist out there in the UDFA world... but the bulk of the major players today and yesterday, and tomorrow, are RBs taken in rounds 1-2

 

Agree, I wouldn't take Gurley at all with the 6th pick but the argument above is never a good way to run a team.  Take each guy individually.

[slats]

I understand the draft pick as a valuable commodity argument, but not the second contract argument. Nobody holds a gun to your head and makes you pay the RB on his second contract. Plus, if RB is so plug and play and used up so fast, I can see some point in just using the pick up. Run the kid into the ground and draft another.

I don't know about Gurley specifically, but I agree with this philosophy in general. It makes even more sense with the rookie wage scale. Run him into the ground over five years and move on. If he's truly an impact player, it's hard to argue against.

[derp]

This is a classic sh*tty argument... is it true? kind of... but you can say that about virtually any round. List all the running backs taken in round 2, or 3 or 4 and you can make the same assessment. It doesn't matter what round you're talking about. Yes, there's a handful of a Arian Fosters out there who remind us that gems exist out there in the UDFA world... but the bulk of the major players today and yesterday, and tomorrow, are RBs taken in rounds 1-2

 

 

The point was simply that it hasn't been a good investment recently. It hasn't. Almost none of those guys have worked out. But here are all of the backs drafted in the second and third rounds since 2008:

 

Bishop Sankey, Jeremy Hill, Carlos Hyde, Gio Bernard, Le'Veon Bell, Montee Ball, Eddie Lacy, Christine Michael, Isaiah Pead, LaMichael James, Ryan Williams, Shane Vereen, Mikel Leshoure, Daniel Thomas, Dexter McCluster, Toby Gerhart, Ben Tate, Montario Hardesty, LeSean McCoy, Matt Forte, Ray Rice.

 

Tre Mason, Terrance West, Jerrick McKinnon, Dri Archer, Knile Davis, Ronnie Hillman, Bernard Pierce, Demarco Murray, Stevan Ridley, Alex Green, Shonn Greene, Glen Coffee, Kevin Smith, Jacob Hester, Jamaal Charles, Steve Slaton.

 

 

More nobodies mixed in there, but more quality players too. 

 

I'm also not sure what your last sentence was getting at. One, I never made an argument for trying to cobble together a group of backs from UDFA's. Two, your second argument is correct more or less - but you've stretched it to the second round.

 

My point was that 1) first round running backs who have worked out haven't actually led their teams anywhere and on top of that 2) most first round running backs don't even work out. But I've got no issue with taking guys in rounds 2/3 which is where the meat of the talent at the position has been recently.

[Paradis]

 

 

My point was that 1) first round running backs who have worked out haven't actually led their teams anywhere and on top of that 2) most first round running backs don't even work out. But I've got no issue with taking guys in rounds 2/3 which is where the meat of the talent at the position has been recently.

 

All i was getting at really, is that it's erroneous to point to rnd 1 RB flubs like there's a higher propensity for that to happen in Round 1 (as a reason to stay away from drafting RBs early).. it happens in every round, at the same volume. rnd is obviously higher profile names, so it's more memorable. Bigger risk, bigger reward.

[derp]

All i was getting at really, is that it's erroneous to point to rnd 1 RB flubs like there's a higher propensity for that to happen in Round 1 (as a reason to stay away from drafting RBs early).. it happens in every round, at the same volume. rnd is obviously higher profile names, so it's more memorable. Bigger risk, bigger reward.

 

That's just you making a jump in my logic that wasn't there though. I'm not saying there's a higher propensity for it to happen round one. But between successful round 1 backs not being on good teams and not many round 1 backs actually being good, I think you're better off investing less in the position in a later round. Maybe you're not more likely to get a good player, but you're also investing a lot less in said player.

[JetBlue]

Thx, I haven't yet. But I will check it out.

You are welcome.