The RB Myth

[Losmeister]

1 hour ago, themeangreenkillingmachine said:

before he blossomed))

i missed it

[Sperm Edwards]

13 hours ago, bealeb319 said:

Your statistics did not disprove the statement though it proved it. You can get a rb in any round just have to be lucky. Arian foster was a udfa he was pretty good.

Sent from my LGUS991 using JetNation.com mobile app
 

Holy crap, this. What a silly measurement of what is a total waste of a draft pick. There is quite a bit of circular logic to the numbers.

1) A RB drafted in rounds 1-2 is drafted to be the starting feature back. A RB drafted "3rd to 7th" (which is more than a little silly, since it equates pick #65 with pick #265) is often drafted specifically to be a backup behind an entrenched starter. If not that, then they're often (or typically) drafted to be complementary players. Teams in desperate need of a RB starter don't typically go with a late round pick and nothing else. You could count the Jets last year, but we were a team all-in on QB for 1 year. Also we've been run quite badly for years, so there's that also. 

2) Toss in the low career length for most backs, and there isn't the impetus to keep giving the same guy a chance for years on end. Then when they hit FA, there's the similar likelihood they're picked up to be cheaper backups on a team already set at the position. When a mid/low round pick gets injured, the team is far less likely to hold a spot for him as its returning, presumptive starter. But if drafted in round 1 in particular, it's a heavy investment for a team: they don't reinvest heavily, and are more likely to then go to a RBBC duo/trio, for a year until the invested-in starter regains his health.

3) Lastly, there are plenty of teams that still employ a committee just outright by design, for years at a time (in this year alone, teams like Atlanta, GB, SF, and others). 

4) A player can be a one-time 1000-yard back, taken with a 1st round pick, and still be a wasted pick the team would like to have back. Jeremy Hill comes to mind. If the cutoff was a year later I'm sure Fournette (whose 4th overall pick slot was worth a pair of 1s and more) would be there as well. 

5) I'm not sure where the "10 of 17" 1000-yard rusher numbers come from, but it's nonsense as well.

• Yeldon, Abdullah, Sankey, Hyde, Bernard, Ball, Michael, Richardson, Wilson, Pead, James. That's 11 RBs drafted from 2012-2016 alone who never reached 1000 rushing yards in a season.
• If the "study" went back just 2 more years, the success rate plummets further with 8 of 11 as wasted picks, and that's with the generous benefit of considering CJ Spiller and Ryan Mathews as good picks worthy of their respective 9th and 12th overall selections. More accurate is 10 of 11 RBs selected from rounds 1-2 were picks the teams regretted, despite being given every benefit of the doubt not afforded to late round picks. No wonder the cutoff began arbitrarily at 2012.

[rex-n-effect]

You can find good RBs "in any round" depending upon your needs at that position. Most team are not building an offense around a single great rusher. A lot of the role RBs used to play has gone away with the pass happy league rules or shifted to other players (like TEs).

You can get by with two or three RBs who are reliable players but not great at any particular skill. That's why we haven't moved on from Powell. He isn't a star but he's dependable to do a decent job and he's improved a little as a receiver. Grab a late round pick to do the same thing and look around FA for a decent guy who can compliment Powell and you have an RB group that isn't going to win games but will let you focus on a winning passing game. It would be great to have a star RB in that mix but if the choice is between drafting a great WR or a great RB in the first round you're probably better off with a great WR rookie. However, if the offense needs the RBs to do more then you need to find better RBs than just ok and you'll have to look at early rounds and FA.

[Savage69]

14 minutes ago, CrazyCarl40 said:

This. The real myth is that a RB needs to rush for 1,000 yards to be successful. I’d rather that RB have over 1,000 scrimmage yards. And those guys can be found in rounds 3-7 easily. It’s done every year. 

Like Terrell Davis a 6th rd pick that had over 2200 scrimmage yds in 1998.. He had 1 less td rushing then Elway did passing..

[#27TheDominator]

1 hour ago, themeangreenkillingmachine said:

Aside from Henry, how are those guys faring now? 

Another argument can be made is that 1st Rd picks are given more of an opportunity because of the investment the team made in them. They'll be given 250+ carries despite averaging no more than 4.0 ypc. Meanwhile late Rd picks can average 5.0 ypc but never get more than 150 carries. 

I'm sure if Bilall Powell ever got 250+ carries and could stay healthy, he would have been a 1000 yard back. (Excluding his first 3 seasons (before he blossomed)) 

Why do we care? 

A draft pick is a commodity.  It is worth that rookie contract.  People on here talk about drafting "10 year starters."  I don't want them.  I want a guy that significantly outperforms his rookie deal and then replace him with another.  Lacy had like 29 TDs for the Pack at over 4.4 ypc.  Martin had 2 monster years on his rookie deal.  It was the contract that made him a bad deal.  Bilal Powell's 4th season was his contract year.  He also has 20 total TDs (15/5) in 8 seasons.  During his rookie deal he provided a total of 6 TDs, all rushing.  Lacy had 29 (23/6). Henry has 23 (22/1) in 3 seasons.  Hill had 30 (29/1). Martin had 22 (20/2) in his first 4 years for Tampa. 

I would rather burn a higher pick, take my production and move on.  I'm not sure why they don't, but they don't.

[PepPep]

The quality of the Offensive line and ability for the QB to be a threat has a big influence on how well the RB does. 

I think Powell could have rushed for 1,000 yards in 2016 and 2017 (he rushed for just over 700) but the O-line was lacking and the QBs were Fitz (in his down year) and McCown. 

[Sperm Edwards]

Suggesting any RB drafted in round 3 or later is a wasted pick is myopic at best, and its circular logic perpetuates a "myth" of its own. Teams draft players for specific reasons plenty often, and a good number of times a late-round back is drafted specifically to be the backup or even the backup's backup.

Just from the past 2 drafts, these were wasted draft picks because they didn't reach 1000 rushing yards:

• Cohen was not a wasted pick just because he had a mere 444 rushing yards to pair with his 725 receiving that went a long way to helping make Trubisky look halfway decent.
• Conner was not a wasted draft pick because he only had 972 rushing yards (and 500 receiving yards, and 13 TDs) in his lone 12-start season. He wasn't a wasted pick the year before that just because a top-2 RB was already on the team.
• The statistical cutoff necessarily labels Kamara as a total waste of a draft pick. 
• M.Mack? Unworthy of using even a late 4th round compensatory pick to draft him because he's a jackass and only got a dozen carries per game.
• Aaron Jones and his league-best 5.5ypc? Also a total waste of a draft pick. They should have taken a special team/dimeback. 
• This past year, Lindsay would have been a waste of even a 7th round pick. 

The low percentage of 1000-yard backs is in no small part due to opportunity (plus throw in players in general, at any position, are typically better in higher rounds than later on).

[jgb]

The problem is I barely trust Macc at the top of the first what are the odds that he’s going to find the next kamara? Well zero since he balked on trading up for... Kamara.

[PCP63]

11 hours ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

Mike Alstott was about as elusive as a freight train.  He was a fullback for G-d's sakes. His running style was to seek and destroy. The reason for his longevity was due to the fact that he was a MOOSE!

I'll elaborate more when not on my phone, but Alstott was one of the most elusive backs in the game. Elusive does NOT mean being fast or agile. 

[Sperm Edwards]

1 hour ago, jgb said:

The problem is I barely trust Macc at the top of the first what are the odds that he’s going to find the next kamara? Well zero since he balked on trading up for... Kamara.

No argument there. My point was more that according to this "study" Kamara would be considered a bad or "wasted" draft pick (among its other assumptions). 

If one sets silly measurements as the thresholds for success, one ends up with skewed results that aren't worth paying attention to. 

[jgb]

29 minutes ago, Sperm Edwards said:

No argument there. My point was more that according to this "study" Kamara would be considered a bad or "wasted" draft pick (among its other assumptions). 

If one sets silly measurements as the thresholds for success, one ends up with skewed results that aren't worth paying attention to. 

It always amazes me how so many people who know everything can disagree about everything on JN

[MaxAF]

Jets want a 1000 yard rusher? 

1st step: Get an O-line that can open up holes for a RB to run through. 

I don’t care what round the Jets draft a RB in or how much money they through at a vet. RB. or how creative a RB is. If there is no where to run they won’t be successful. Great RBs can create, cut back, be patient in finding seams but if there’s nothing there but a Defensive wall to run into or D-Linemen are hitting you before you get to the hole you’re not going anywhere. I’m hoping the Jets are planning to make some major upgrades and throw some big money into the Line.

[Sperm Edwards]

21 minutes ago, jgb said:

It always amazes me how so many people who know everything can disagree about everything on JN

I disagree

[Sperm Edwards]

Just now, MaxAF said:

Jets want a 1000 yard rusher? 

1st step: Get an O-line that can open up holes for a RB to run through. 

I don’t care what round the Jets draft a RB in or how much money they through at a vet. RB. or how creative a RB is. If there is no where to run they won’t be successful. Great RBs can create, cut back, be patient in finding seams but if there’s nothing there but a Defensive wall to run into or D-Linemen are hitting you before you get to the hole you’re not going anywhere. I’m hoping the Jets are planning to make some major upgrades and throw some big money into the Line.

+1

I'm more concerned with having a good all-around back who is an asset catching out of the backfield and doesn't do nothing when his responsibility is to pick up a blitzer. I don't mind paying during Darnold's development, even though I think most with 50% more production are products of their situations (OL included) more than 50% differences in ability. But just in this short term I'm ok with paying this luxury tax in FA, though I wouldn't have a limitless ceiling (or at that money, a 3 yr guarantee) in my offer.

[bigalbarracuda]

On 3/3/2019 at 8:56 PM, choon328 said:

Add Doug Martin, Jeremy Hill, Derrick Henry and Eddie Lacy to the 1000 yard rushing club as well.

Didn't highlight them because even though they've all had flashes they were not RBs to be feared or schemed around. I mean Martin had a great rookie year and then one additional solid year in his 7 years... not a great argument for drafting a 1st round RB.

[Smashmouth]

23 hours ago, joenamathwouldn'tcry said:

Maybe the latest  "Genius of the Month Club" member Matt Nagy, coach of the Bears, should consider this before throwing away Jordan Howard like yesterday's news.  Howard a former 5th round pick, has had years of  1,313, 1,122, and 935 yards rushing  in his first three years In the league.  Now they are "shopping" him because of  dwindling YPC averages.  Maybe it's the way he's being used, that's the root of the problem?

More to do with ability . Howard is not a good receiving back and if you want to remain a passing team in this day and age your Running back needs to be at least catching 40-50 balls + a year, making him a double threat . I think Howard was averaging 15-20 balls a year. Why are guys like Gurley, Bell, Hunt, Kamara, Gordon, part of dynamic offenses because they are double threats. Other teams have to bring in backs who can catch basically telegraphing what they intend to do. Drew Brees and the Saints have made a career of throwing to backs, he does not hover around 70% passing because he's throwing the ball 20 + yards down field all day long it's because the guy throws a ton of balls to a capable stable of RB's. One year Brees had 190 completions to RB's. Having a Stud Running back like Kamara is nice but having him be able to both catch and run and having 1-2 guys behind him that can do the same is what makes the position shine

[joenamathwouldn'tcry]

42 minutes ago, Smashmouth said:

More to do with ability . Howard is not a good receiving back and if you want to remain a passing team in this day and age your Running back needs to be at least catching 40-50 balls + a year, making him a double threat . I think Howard was averaging 15-20 balls a year. Why are guys like Gurley, Bell, Hunt, Kamara, Gordon, part of dynamic offenses because they are double threats. Other teams have to bring in backs who can catch basically telegraphing what they intend to do. Drew Brees and the Saints have made a career of throwing to backs, he does not hover around 70% passing because he's throwing the ball 20 + yards down field all day long it's because the guy throws a ton of balls to a capable stable of RB's. One year Brees had 190 completions to RB's. Having a Stud Running back like Kamara is nice but having him be able to both catch and run and having 1-2 guys behind him that can do the same is what makes the position shine

Granted that Howard is not a receiving back of the caliber of Kamara, Gordon or Hunt, it is not as if he can't catch the ball.  In fact he has nearly identical receiving statistics to  Kamara's counterpart on the Saints, Mark Ingram.  Gordon caught the ball at a rate of 77% , same as Ingram with both receivers catching 20 passes each.  No one is accusing Ingram of being deficient as a receiver, why disparage Howard.

Also you have to consider the quarterbacks in these cases.  Mitch Trubisky pales in comparison as a thrower to the likes of the great Drew Brees, Mahomes, Rivers, or even Goff.  Then you have the offensive philosophies.  Tarik Cohen is the receiving back on the Bears, like Kamara is on the Saints, and to a lesser degree Hunt was on the Chiefs.  The fact that Matt Nagy perhaps chooses to move away from Howard, doesn't necessarily mean that he can't catch the ball. By the same token one would expect Cohen to break down if he was asked to run the ball between the tackles 250 times.  That is the responsibility for a back such as Howard, which he has done successfully to the tune of 3,000 yards in three seasons.

Your point is well taken.  I'm sure this is the feeling of Matt Nagy.  Good luck to him.  I think he'll find that he will always need in an offense the attributes that Howard offers to the offense.  Every offense needs a between the tackles back who can do the heavy lifting.  I think the Bears had good balance with the tandem of  Howard and Cohen. It sure worked against the Jets. The Bears rushing attack far outperformed their passing attack in league rankings.  They were 6th in attempts, 11th in yardage, and 7th in touchdowns.  The area where they did poorly was in YPC.  Perhaps it was on the offensive line, maybe it was the backs.  Time will tell.

[Jetsplayer21]

On 3/3/2019 at 8:42 PM, New York Mick said:

They’ve only taken 4 RBs earlier in the last 30 years  

Vick - 1st RD

Thomas - 1st RD 2nd overall

Jordan - 2nd RD

Greene - 3rd RD

 

Wonder How many offensive lineman in the early round were taken past 30.. 

[New York Mick]

6 hours ago, Jetsplayer21 said:

Wonder How many offensive lineman in the early round were taken past 30.. 

http://www.nfl.com/draft/history/fulldraft?teamId=3430&type=team