Trent Richardson - DawgTalkers.net

Give me Cyrus Gray in the 4th....perfect fit, great receiver

Gotta love what Sherman had to say about him:

Intangibles: Sherman referred to Gray as a "guy you want to marry your daughter" because of his attitude and work ethic on and off the field. Accepts whatever role he is given on the team, supports teammates who may get more touches. "We" player, deflects praise to teammates.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1620865/cyrus-gray

Quote:

Drafting a guy who will likely only have a 5-6 year productive career is just not smart.

Once again, running backs are a dime a dozen player. You can find them early, middle, late or UDFA in any draft, not to mention Free Agency and trades.

In a passing based offense, it isn't wise to invest a top 5 pick in a guy who won't be the focal point of the offense.

Contracts are I believe 5 years max, and as such EVERY PLAYER only has a 5 year max production on first contract. If he's good, you re-sign, if he's not he's gone regardless of position. Moot point.

Top 5 over who?

Foster
Peterson
MJD
Rice
Forte
Mccoy
C Johnson

Arian Foster, Ahmad Bradshaw, Pierre Thomas, BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Michael Turner, Frank Gore, LeSean McCoy, DeMarco Murray, LeGarrette Blount, Ray Rice, Maurice Jones-Drew.

All are good reasons why we shouldn't take a running back in the first round.

Quote:

taking a first round back, or the 1st back off the board is rarely a bad thing,

You just listed twenty-four players. Of those twenty-four, twelve (Spiller, Moreno, Bush, Maroney, Cadillac, Brown, Benson, Green, Duckett, Jones, and Dayne. Lynch was good for two years before they had to trade him.) were busts for the team that drafted them. When I see rarely I think, "most of the time these guys will be successful". 50% is not most of the time.

I would much rather use a later pick and draft a guy like LaMichael James, Chris Polk, or Doug Martin. I would also try and sign a few undrafted guys and see if they stick.

Forte, Rice, MJD

Quote:

Forte, Rice, MJD

That is absurd, there is no way.

Wouldn't you agree that you don't even need a top five back in the NFL?

There absolutely is a way. Every top running back comes along sometime, and Richardson is the second most talented runner in the game. Tell me why he can't be better than those guys?

Quote:

He'll be a top-five running back from day one, just like Adrian Peterson in 2007.

This I agree with. Trent Richardson is not your normal top RB in the NFL draft.

Richardson is about as sure a bet as we can get at the RB position. He's got the talent at the level of Adrian Peterson and Ladanian Tomilinson.

Rarely does a RB do much for me, and I've been much more interested in Doug Martin lately, but drafting Richardson would not be a problem for me at all.

I get that a lot factors into a successful run game, the scheme and the O-Line are very important. But talent wise, Trent Richardson blows most everyone out of the water. He's a workout nut, he's very good on the field, great vision, doesn't fumble the ball, good hands, decent blocker.

He has the talent of a future HOFer. Would I mind drafting someone like that? No, not at all

Quote:

Theres been a lot of Trent Richardson talk lately...

We keep saying dont take him because it is too high to take a RB.

Look at RBs that have been taken in the top 10 in the last 10 years...

2011 - Mark Ingram #28 NO (First off)
2010 - CJ Spiller #9 Buffalo
2009 - Knowshon Moreno #12 Denver (1st off, not top 10)
2008 - Darren McFadden #4 Oakland, also Jonathon Stewart #13 Carolina (though not top 10)
2007 - Adrian Peterson #7 Minnesota, also Marshawn Lynch #12 Buffalo
2006 - Reggie Bush #2 NO, also Laurence Maroney #21 NE
2005 - Ronnie Brown #2 Miami, Ced Benson #4 Chicago, Cadillac Williams #5 TB
2004 - Steven Jackson #24 STL (first off)
2003 - Willis McGahee #23 Buffalo (first off), Larry Johnson #27 KC
2002 - William Green #16 Cleveland (first off), TJ Duckett #18 ATL
2001 - LaDanian Tomlinson #5 SD, also, Deuce McAllister #23 NO
2000 - Jamal Lewis #5 Baltimore, Thomas Jones #7 AZ, Ron Dayne #11 NYG, Shaun Alexander #19
1999 - Edgerrin James #4 Indy

Looking at first round running backs, especially those taken in the top 10 or first off the board...Are generally VERY successful and successful to the point where they are franchise guys. Not always has it been for the team that picked them, but they have become legitimately good running backs in this league...Some of which have gone on to be the best in their franchise's history, or the best since.

Point is...saying that #4 is too high because its easy to find guys later is not overly true.

Yea theres an Arian Foster or MJD to be found, but your franchise backs are found in the 1st round...hahaha, but really, 1st round backs are pretty darn good.

Maroney, William Green, Duckett, Dayne and Moreno have been busts...
Benson, Lynch, McGahee, and Bush were better for other teams...
Larry Johnson is the only back that was good that it wasnt sustained...

taking a first round back, or the 1st back off the board is rarely a bad thing, and Richardson seems to have the abilities of Adrian Peterson...

I keep hearing Stronger Ray Rice and bigger MJD...With our RB situation...how can we go wrong with this guy? We need production there, especially if Hillis leaves...

Of those 24 1st round rb's you name, knowing what they produced, how many would you take with the #4 pick?

I would take:

AP, Steven Jackson, Shaun Alexander and Edge. Larry Johnson and JLewis would be a maybe's. Many might say McFadden but he is way to fragile.

That is 4-6 out of 24. When I read your list I thought you were trying to convince me to not take Richardson at #4

Quote:

Give me Cyrus Gray in the 4th....perfect fit, great receiver

Gotta love what Sherman had to say about him:

Intangibles: Sherman referred to Gray as a "guy you want to marry your daughter" because of his attitude and work ethic on and off the field. Accepts whatever role he is given on the team, supports teammates who may get more touches. "We" player, deflects praise to teammates.

http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/draft/players/1620865/cyrus-gray

I really like Gray... wouldn't mind him here... He's a hard worker and I think has a lot of talent... if I remember correctly though he had some injury problems this year, but I might be wrong on that...

I'm not high on Richardson at #4... I'd take him a little later if we traded down, but I'd rather go QB (if RG3 were there) or the CB from LSU... I'm just not sure about a WR or RB at #4... thankfully I'm not drafting though

Quote:

Richardson is the second most talented runner in the game. Tell me why he can't be better than those guys?

We agree Deep, we agree.

There's two guys in this draft who are ridiculously good. Andrew Luck and Trent Richardson. Richardson, talent wise is better than pretty much any running back in the NFL. Production wise....... That's up to how the dice rolls (injuries) and the rest of his offense. But that's the case with many WRs and QBs too.

But as a pure player, who would I rather have on my team, Trent Richardson or any other RB. I'll go Trent Richardson over everyone. Peterson tore his ACL and I've always worried about injuries with him.

But IMO, he's got the talent of the great ones. Watch, Browns get Richardson, and we'll have our Curtis Martin (a back who plays about 10 seasons and never misses a game!) Except, he'll be even better than Curtis Martin, and he won't leave the Browns, the way he left the Pats (how stupid were they for letting him go to Parcells and the Jets!)

Trent Richardson = STUD and could possibly become my new favorite RB ever (over Curtis Martin) and the next Cleveland Brown and Danger's next Jersey

Quote:

talent wise is better than pretty much any running back in the NFL

LOL

Quote:

There absolutely is a way. Every top running back comes along sometime, and Richardson is the second most talented runner in the game. Tell me why he can't be better than those guys?

I want to see him catch more passes, I want to see him pass block. I want to see how great his vision is and what type of decisions he makes on cutbacks and finding the holes. He doesn't have elite speed, it's okay 4.4-4.5 maybe on a good day.

Show me all the highlights you want, i've watched plenty of Peterson in college and plenty of Richardson. These are guys I have watched. Richardson is as good of a prospect AND he didn't get injured the way Peterson did.

That was the knack on Peterson coming out, and why he didn't get drafted very high. Injury concerns. Richardson hasn't shown this to be an issue. And talent wise, I find Richardson to be as good.

You can say I'm wrong, that's okay. But you'll see. Save some career ending injury, I'm willing to bet I'll be right on Trent Richardson. He's as good as any RB in the NFL. Will he lead the league in rushing and rushing TD's? That depends on the position he's put in, but if given the correct opportunity, I'm willing to bet he will

Richardson's hands are one of his best attributes...

Love his hands but man I love his ability to avoid loss of yards. Over and over, I see what should be a 3 yard loss turn into a 3 to 8 yard gain out of absolutely nothing. The last back to do that was Emmit Smith and that is who Richardson reminds me of.

RB is one of the easiest positions to scout (Thanks, Butch

) so the one's taken early tend to have very high hit rates. With that in mind, I'm still of the opinion that while RB's tend to be over-rated by fans (but not the league) Richardson is probably the safest guy in this draft. I've no idea where it is, but I'm still of the sentiment that I wouldn't be the least bit upset if we took him. Would #4 be high? Yes, but if it were me personally, I'd pay an extra premium to have a much greater chance of a successful player.

As for the comparisons, the very first guy I thought of was Rice, as he truly does look like a bigger version of him. He's a true 3-down back. If I remember correctly, he's fumbled exactly one time in the last 450+ carries. Speed, strength, great vision, natural pass catcher...What's not to like.

Quote:

He'll be a top-five running back from day one, just like Adrian Peterson in 2007.

You're wrong.

He'll be a top-three running back from day one.

I get the concept of value. What are positions of value for a #4 pick?

I look at value as...if its a top 5 pick...does that guy solidify that position, and make it a strength for 8-10 years. I think Trent would do that, therefore the value works for me.

Could anyone argue that LaDanian Tomlinson was a good value for the Chargers at 5? Was Edge good value for Indy at 4? Or...AP at 7?

I feel like if we went on value for things...the only guys that should go in the top 5 are LTs and QBs...

Could be. Wouldn't surprise me a bit.

I compare Richardson to a bigger Maurice Jones-Drew.

I am trying to remember the last truly great RB who took his team to a Super Bowl victory without an equally great QB by his side.

Maybe the Ravens in 2001 ..... but that was more a once in a lifetime defense than anything else. maybe Anderson going for 102 in a defensive struggle back in 1991. Marcus Allen in 1984 certainly had a performance for the ages. Other than that, it's been mostly QB driven teams, especially in the past decade or so, who win Super Bowls.

I want to win Super Bowls. I don't want to get "pretty good" ..... I want a great team. Great teams need a great QB more than they need a great RB, especially with the way the passing rules are today.

I would have no problem with Richardson if we were set at QB, but we are not. The QB is the game changer in today's NFL, and we should get one while we have this opportunity. I believe that there are 2 game changing QBs in this draft, and that this draft will be a major failure if we make our selections and one of the 2 names Luck or Griffin III are not on our list. (unless we have already traded for a potentially great QB... like if Tampa loses their mind and decides to trade Freeman to us)

As always, JMESHO.

j/c

I went through the last eleven drafts (2001-2011) to try and find out how easy it was to find a RB in rounds 3-7.

There were 161 RBs drafted, 14 of those have had a 1000 yard season (8.7%). Of those 14, only half had more than one 1000 yard season. (Charles, Gore, Jacobs, Turner, Dominack Davis/Williams, Westbrook, and Rudi Johnson). Seven out of 161 RBs draft in rounds 3-7 have had multiple 1000 yard seasons (Charles is the only of those RBs drafted in the past 6 years to have multiple).

That tells me that RBs aren't as easy to find as most seem to think.

Quote:

Seven out of 161 RBs draft in rounds 3-7 have had multiple 1000 yard seasons (Charles is the only of those RBs drafted in the past 6 years to have multiple).

214...that's some good stuff that definitely supports the pov, where RBs are drafted does matter.

As for Richardson becoming a Brown, impart, depends on what happens with Hillis.

Another consideration, do the Browns rate the need for WR ahead of RB.

LaMichael James, runningback Oregon.

.

However ..... then you look at guys like BenJarvus Green-Ellis, LeGarrette Blount, and Arian Foster who went undrafted entirely, and who have each had at least one 1000 yard season, and you have to ask yourself if it's all that hard to do.

Further, I think that part of it is the age of specialization we find ourselves in. Buffalo, for example, had Jackson and Spiller combine for about 1500 yards. Carolina had Williams and Stewart combine for almost 1600 yards. (plus Cam newton's 700) Chicago had Forte and Barber combine for over 1400 yards. Dallas had 2 guys combine for over 1400 yards. The list goes on.

Some teams rely on a single guy, (mainly) but it seems like most teams today rely upon a variety of guys to carry the rushing load. Maybe one guy doesn't get the huge numbers, but the team has an effective rushing attack nonetheless.

Quote:

Value...and no, I don't expect you to get it, it's ok

I think the whole subject of "Value" is contrived. It's something brought out by sports talking heads and draftniks.

I don't think I've ever heard a GM or coach or team President speak in terms of "Value".

it's almost like transference.. from a Madden mentality to the real world.

personally, if we like Richardson and he's there at 4, take him. Value be damned.

We agree. My dog just started barking at something outside. I checked it out and there appeared to be a piglike object overhead....

Quote:

RB is one of the easiest positions to scout (Thanks, Butch ) so the one's taken early tend to have very high hit rates.

Help me out here, isn't that statement true of any position?

walterfootball.com is reporting that the Browns have talked to FAU Running Back Alfred Morris..Link

Here are his highlights:

He reminds me a lot of a guy we have here now.. but even more like a Jamal Lewis..

If you've been around for a while, and you ask your self "what is Browns football?", the answer has to start with a strong running game. Yes, there has been one great QB, and several good QBs in our history, but until the 90's, when the wheels came off this once proud franchise, the constant in our offensive approach was "in Cleveland, we run the ball". Marion Motley, Dub Jones, Jim Brown, Leroy Kelly, Greg Pruitt, Mike Pruitt, Kevin Mack, Earnest Byner. 3 HOF RB's, and a host of "very goods".

I know what you're thinking: the game has changed, old man, the NFL is a passing game now. To which I reply, with all due respect ... bollocks. A good-to-great running game energizes an O-Line, fatigues and demoralizes an opponents defense, keeps your defense off the field and fresh for the 4th qtr, keeps your opponents offense off the field, shortens the game, and reduces hits on your QB. It is intuitive that in this climate, in an outdoor stadium - especially in November and December - that you need a strong running game. In this division, with stack-the-box, blitz-crazy defenses, a strong running game will save your QB's life, and set up the passing game with play-action that is meaningful because D's respect your run. I watched our games against Pitt, Baltimore, and Cinci, and I'm going to tell you, those teams could be run on if we stayed with it.

Which is my long-winded way of saying that if you can get a Trent Richardson at 4, you do it and never look back. Then, you sign Hillis. Then, in 2012, you pound the rock right up their keesters. Its Browns' football, the way it oughta be.

[Taking the onion off my belt and turning off my Grampa Simpson voice now.]

I think that Richardson might be the safest pick in the Draft, but at #4 I,m more inclined to trade down then to take a RB so high.

We all would like to think that he will make a difference, but with the way this current staff platoons our RB's he doesn't stand much of a chance of making that big of an impact ... Especially with the absence of a true go to WR. We will continue to be one dimensional on offense and defenses will continue to key on our running game, thus limiting how effective even a great RB can be.

On the other hand if we had a true go to #1 WR, it will help our running game no matter who we have lined up at RB.

A running game can set up the play action pass (and it's one of my favorite plays too), but the point becomes moot if your WR's can't beat one on one coverage.

So having a great RB without a great WR and or passing attack is a little like bringing a knife to a gun fight.

I used to pay attention to highlight reels.. until I realized the following existed:

or this one

Running backs are a dime a dozen and we have spent a bucket load of dimes without a consistent, young back!

Quote:

Quote:

RB is one of the easiest positions to scout (Thanks, Butch ) so the one's taken early tend to have very high hit rates.

Help me out here, isn't that statement true of any position?

Not at all.

Well, many positions tend to be very high-risk/high-reward. That's not the case at running back. There's much less projection involved.

Quote:

Well, many positions tend to be very high-risk/high-reward. That's not the case at running back. There's much less projection involved.

Thus the view by many that a RB can be found later in the draft?

I look at perhaps three of the greatest backs of all time, Jim Brown, Emmitt Smith and Walter Payton and realize they were all drafted in the 1st round.

I also recognize that other RB's NOT drafted in the 1st have made a significant impact on the game as well.

But those three are, IMO, by far the best ever to play the game.. All 1st rounders.

I'm not sure what, if anything that proves, but it's interesting at least. it may suggest that a back drafted in the first has a better chance at success? dunno

Well, he was drafted in the first because he was better, so that would make sense.

There are a ton of great running backs drafted in the second or later, but the success rate on them isn't all that high.

Quote:

However ..... then you look at guys like BenJarvus Green-Ellis, LeGarrette Blount, and Arian Foster who went undrafted entirely, and who have each had at least one 1000 yard season, and you have to ask yourself if it's all that hard to do.

Sorry it took so long to get back to this. After reading this I decided to do a little digging and went back through the last 10 seasons and found every 1000 yard rusher. Then I found what round they were picked in.

There were 74 different players who had 167 thousand yard seasons
31 First Rounders had 87 seasons
14 Second 32 seasons
12 Third 24 seasons
4 Fourth 8 seasons
1 Fifth 3 seasons
2 Sixth 2 seasons
3 Seventh 3 seasons
7 Undrafted 12 seasons

Excluding 2011 Draft picks:
22 of 31 First Rounder had multiple
8 of 14 Second
7 of 12 Third
3 of 4 Fourth
1 of 1 Fifth
0 of 2 Sixth
0 of 3 Seventh
4 of 7 Undrafted

30 of 45 first and second rounders had multiple, 15 of 29 third through undrafted had multiple.

Impressive work.

So basically you are doubling your chances of getting a solid back by selecting your talent in the first round over even the 2nd round.

No doubt you can find the talent all across the board, but from a odds standpoint, you are far better off selecting guys in round one.

Good Lord that's a lot of work!

My next question ... which I absolutely do not expect you to go back through and tally because of the huge amount of work involved, would be .......... "out of how many?". I am curious how many RB go high in each draft. It doesn't seem like very many to me. I know that Ingram (474 yards) was the only one this past year. 2010's draft had Spiller (283/561 yards), Matthews, (678/1091) and Best. (555/390) These haven't been guys to turn around a franchise. 2009's draft had Moreno, (947/779/179) Brown (281/497/645) and Wells. (792/397/1047)

We got a better season out of Hillis last year than these teams did out of any of these 1st round picks.

I do think that RB is a position that easily translates from college to the pros. It might even be the easiest position. A RB doesn't have to learn complex pass patterns in order to contribute. He just hits a hole, same as in college, and goes. (and that's not to say that some teams don't require pass routes/blocking from their backs ... but the running part seems to me to be mostly instinctual)

Now an NFL coach can screw up a college RB by trying to square hole a guy ........ forcing a "between the tackles" guy to run sweeps, and such ...... but it seems like a RB either has the instincts, or he doesn't.

Well, I think it's common knowledge that 1st rounders at ANY position have a higher success rate than later in the draft....the point though is, that late round RBs have a higher success % than at most other positions (esp. QBs)....also, with late rounders you can go with quantitiy more...meaning, you can draft a RB in the 5th to 7th every draft and chances are every 3rd/4th will be a decent one....or 2nd to 4th the chances get even much better, otoh look at 2nd round+ QBs and their success %....good recap: http://www.draftcountdown.com/features/23qb/23qbs.php

Funny, from that list KC, OAK and CLE selected a 2n/3rd round QB 3 times, ARI even 4 selections...and none has a franchise QB

the RB talent pool is simply MUCH deeper than at QB in ANY draft (most of that is simply because RB is a much easier position to play and the transition from College to NFL isn't nearly as complex and difficult as for QBs)

Guys you never heard of are 3rd stringers on rosters at QB, but at RB it's survival of the fittest when roster cuts approach...guys like Kevin Smith, starter, high pick and all...are out of the league in a hurry...remember the UDFA RB who had some late season success in GB 4 or 5 years ago? I can't even remember his name anymore....had to look it up: Samkon Gado

Point is: you can even grab a guy off a PS or out of FA midseason at RB and have him produce decently (Obi for us, K.Smith in DET), but it's impossible at positions like QB...that's why GMs tend to draft QBs, elite pass rushers/CBs etc in the top 5 and not RBs....VALUE

Not the way odds of selecting a 1000 yd Rb works.

To calculate the odds of selecting a 1000 yd rusher in round 1 you will need to know how many rb's were selected in round 1. So 31/x with x being the number of rb's taken in round 1. That gives you the odds of selecting a 1000 yd rusher in round 1.

Then you do that with each round. Then you can compare how much more likely it is to get a 1000 yd rusher in round 1 vs some other round.

With the data provided what you can say half of the 1000 yd rushers were selecting in round 1 or 2.

Interesting that there are more undrafted FA rb's with 1000 yd seasons than rbs drafted in rounds 5/6/7 put together. Could it be that the undrafted FA rb's get to pick the team they sign with? Is there something more to it?

Good points Dj

Id love to see a 50/50 split with Richardson and Hillis....talk about wearing down a D!

Quote:

Not the way odds of selecting a 1000 yd Rb works.

To calculate the odds of selecting a 1000 yd rusher in round 1 you will need to know how many rb's were selected in round 1. So 31/x with x being the number of rb's taken in round 1. That gives you the odds of selecting a 1000 yd rusher in round 1.

Then you do that with each round. Then you can compare how much more likely it is to get a 1000 yd rusher in round 1 vs some other round.

With the data provided what you can say half of the 1000 yd rushers were selecting in round 1 or 2.

I understand it isn't the odds of selecting one. It just the odds are you have twice as good a chance of selecting one.

Quote:

Id love to see a 50/50 split with Richardson and Hillis....talk about wearing down a D!

Don't know how much it would wear down a D when teams stuff 8 guys in the box and we go 3-and-out half the time because we still don't have a passing game.

Whether or not he warrants a #4 pick I just don't see a team that is desperately trying to justify the move to WCO going RB with that pick with this much to chose from in the top 5 of this draft. We need playmakers and Richardson certainly qualifies but the little platoon we have is not where the bleeding is the worst on this team. They need a lot of immediate impact with that #4 and adding another RB is just not going to provide that. We need the parts that make the much talked about and maligned passing game more effective, you can fill in those blanks. Plus, as mentioned there's a lot of decent FA running back talent waiting for the phone to ring. I just don't see H& H, with all the words they'vecommitted in writing to the passing game handing in a RB's card with the #4 pick at the draft.

A 50/50 split with Richardson and Hillis?

Exactly, Because neither would help when the Browns face 3rd and 15, they wouldn't sustain drives anymore than now and the result is no more wins.

I used to like the thought of a Richardson pick at 4, now I think its the wrong move.
I'd rather see them try and get L. James at 37 because you wouldn't necessarilly have to get rid of any of the current rb's . I'm not really counting Brandon Jackson because he hasn't played yet.
If you pick Richardson at 4, you are guaranteeing he has to be one of your top 2 guys, and that thing, nobody knows yet.

Quote:

Because neither would help when the Browns face 3rd and 15

Really? They wouldn't help? I have to ask why.

Because you are most likely in a passing situation.
That brings me to a point I didn't realize, sometimes a third to a half of the game you have to forget about the running back because your team is down alot of points. It would make a Trent Richardson pick even worse.

Quote:

A 50/50 split with Richardson and Hillis?

Exactly, Because neither would help when the Browns face 3rd and 15, they wouldn't sustain drives anymore than now and the result is no more wins.

I used to like the thought of a Richardson pick at 4, now I think its the wrong move.
I'd rather see them try and get L. James at 37 because you wouldn't necessarilly have to get rid of any of the current rb's . I'm not really counting Brandon Jackson because he hasn't played yet.
If you pick Richardson at 4, you are guaranteeing he has to be one of your top 2 guys, and that thing, nobody knows yet.

so you think with both of those guys healthy and running the ball we would be in alot of 3rd and 15's?

Quote:

Because you are most likely in a passing situation.
That brings me to a point I didn't realize, sometimes a third to a half of the game you have to forget about the running back because your team is down alot of points. It would make a Trent Richardson pick even worse.

Hopefully the Browns aren't building a team from the standpoint of, "How will we play when we are down a lot of points."

I think they could have take your pick, any 2 Rb's on the planet, of the last 20 seasons, and they'd still be in alot of 3rd and 15 situations.
OK, ok, ok, Bo Jackson, and Herschel Walker were more than 20 seasons ago.

you do realize that both guys are good at catching passes right? and running over DBs or making slower guys miss? so, a pass to one of these guys is viable, no?

Quote:

you do realize that both guys are good at catching passes right? and running over DBs or making slower guys miss? so, a pass to one of these guys is viable, no?

Exactly why I asked for clarification on that one.

Getting a 1000 yard rusher is completely irrelevant. The goal is to WIN GAMES. You want a stud RB who puts up 1000 yards? Yeah you should probably look at the 1st round. You want an offense that scores points, wins games and goes deep in the playoffs? Don't even think about it.

Here's the two-deep RB roster of the final 8 teams in this seasons playoffs:

New England Patriots : BenJarvus Green-Ellis - UDFA / Stevan Ridley - 3rd Rd
New York Giants : Ahmad Bradshaw - 7th Rd / Brandon Jacobs - 4th Rd
San Francisco 49ers : Frank Gore - 3rd Rd / Kendall Hunter - 4th Rd
Baltimore Ravens : Ray Rice - 2nd Rd / Ricky Williams - 1st Rd
Green Bay Packers : James Starks - 6th Rd / Ryan Grant - UDFA
New Orleans Saints : Darren Sproles - 4th Rd / Pierre Thomas - UDFA
Denver Broncos : Willis McGahee - 1st Rd / Lance Ball - UDFA
Houston Texans : Arian Foster - UDFA / Ben Tate - 2nd Rd

There are only 2 1st round picks out of 16 spots on that list and only ONE starter. Yet there are FIVE UDFA guys!!! plus a 7th rounder and a 6th rounder. So 7 out of 16 were 6th round or LOWER. I'm not making this stuff up.

Meanwhile, guys like AP, MJD, Marshawn Lynch, Steven Jackson etc. are all 1st round picks who put up monster #s and 1000 yard seasons every year....and their teams all SUCK.

Trent Richardson is an amazing RB. Best I've seen since AP...and I want NOTHING to do with him in the 1st round. There's just no value there. I'd much rather pick up a speedy RB in the 3rd/4th or later rounds to compliment Hillis and use our top picks to actually FIX the offense (specifically QB and WR).

It's a great point, and one I think is stronger when you consider both those 1st round guys were FA acquisitions and are not with the team that drafted them.

except you left off Tim tebow

This is the kid from Temple Bernard Pierce. Kid has that "IT".

Quote:

Getting a 1000 yard rusher is completely irrelevant. The goal is to WIN GAMES. You want a stud RB who puts up 1000 yards? Yeah you should probably look at the 1st round. You want an offense that scores points, wins games and goes deep in the playoffs? Don't even think about it.

Here's the two-deep RB roster of the final 8 teams in this seasons playoffs:

New England Patriots : BenJarvus Green-Ellis - UDFA / Stevan Ridley - 3rd Rd
New York Giants : Ahmad Bradshaw - 7th Rd / Brandon Jacobs - 4th Rd
San Francisco 49ers : Frank Gore - 3rd Rd / Kendall Hunter - 4th Rd
Baltimore Ravens : Ray Rice - 2nd Rd / Ricky Williams - 1st Rd
Green Bay Packers : James Starks - 6th Rd / Ryan Grant - UDFA
New Orleans Saints : Darren Sproles - 4th Rd / Pierre Thomas - UDFA
Denver Broncos : Willis McGahee - 1st Rd / Lance Ball - UDFA
Houston Texans : Arian Foster - UDFA / Ben Tate - 2nd Rd

There are only 2 1st round picks out of 16 spots on that list and only ONE starter. Yet there are FIVE UDFA guys!!! plus a 7th rounder and a 6th rounder. So 7 out of 16 were 6th round or LOWER. I'm not making this stuff up.

Meanwhile, guys like AP, MJD, Marshawn Lynch, Steven Jackson etc. are all 1st round picks who put up monster #s and 1000 yard seasons every year....and their teams all SUCK.

Trent Richardson is an amazing RB. Best I've seen since AP...and I want NOTHING to do with him in the 1st round. There's just no value there. I'd much rather pick up a speedy RB in the 3rd/4th or later rounds to compliment Hillis and use our top picks to actually FIX the offense (specifically QB and WR).

Nice work I can really see your point. Also dont we have some kid Adams that sat on the practice squad? Im sold now on no RB in the 1st round. Give me QB/WR/CB in this years draft if we use the #4 pick.

yea.. give me Pierce or Pead and I'm happy.

the more I think about it though.. I'd rather have Pierce over Pead.. b/c we do have Armond Smith on the PS.. I think he could pull a Willie Parker for us in a sense.

Quote:

My next question ... which I absolutely do not expect you to go back through and tally because of the huge amount of work involved, would be .......... "out of how many?".

Lol, actually it wasn't that much work because I've saved all of my previous work and the website I use allows you to sort draft results by just about every option imaginable.

From 2001 to 2011:
First Round 31 draftees, 21 draftees had 54 1000 seasons
Second 28 draftees, 10 had 26
Third 25 draftees, 8 had 15
Fourth 39 draftees, 3 had 7
Fifth 20 draftees, 1 had 3
Sixth 34 draftees, 1 had 1
Seventh 45 draftees, 3 had 3

First 67.7%
Second 35.7%
Third 32%
Fourth 7.7%
Fifth 5%
Sixth 3%
Seventh 6.7%

Some of these numbers may be off by one or two, because of players drafted as a FB out of College, but played RB in the NFL. I caught Peyton Hillis and Justin Fargas, but I'm not 100% sure that they are the only two.

When you're just looking at one year it will be distorted.

2010
Pittsburgh Steelers : Rashard Mendenhall - 1st / Isaac Redman - UDFA
Baltimore Ravens : Ray Rice - 2nd / Willis McGahee - 1st
New York Jets : LaDanian Tomlinson - 1st / Shonn Greene - 3rd
New England Patriots : BenJarvus Green-Ellis - 1st / Danny Woodhead - UDFA
Green Bay Packers : James Starks - 6th / Brandon Jackson - 2nd
Chicago Bears : Matt Forte 2nd / Chester Taylor 6th
Atlanta Falcons : Michael Turner - 5th / Jason Snelling - 7th
Seattle Seahawks : Marshawn Lynch 1st / Justin Forsett 7th

2009
Indianapolis Colts : Joseph Addai 1st / Donald Brown 1st
Baltimore Ravens : Ray Rice - 2nd / Willis McGahee - 1st
New York Jets : Thomas Jones 1st / Shonn Greene 3rd
San Diego Chargers : LaDanian Tomlinson 1st / Darren Sproles 4th
New Orleans aints : Mike Bell UDFA / Pierre Thomas UDFA
Arizona Cardinals : Chris Wells 1st / Tim Hightower 5th
Minnesota Vikings : Adrian Peterson 1st / Chester Taylor 6th
Dallas Cowboys : Marion Barber 4th / Felix Jones 1st

2008
Arizona Cardinals : Edgerrin James 1st / Tim Hightower 5th
Carolina Panthers : DeAngelo Williams 1st / Jonathan Stewart 1st
Phildelphia Eagles : Brian Westbrook 3rd / Correl Buckhalter 4th
New York Giants : Brandon Jacobs 4th / Derrick Ward 7th
Baltimore Ravens : Willis McGahee 1st / Le'Ron McClain 4th
Tennessee Titans : Chris Johnson 1st / LenDale White 2nd
Pittsburgh Steelers : Willie Parker UDFA / Mwelde Moore 4th
San Diego Chargers : LaDanian Tomlinson 1st / Darren Sproles 4th

19 first rounders in 48 spots, including 13 of the 24 starters. 11 of 48 were 6th round or lower, with 3 starters.

More than half of the final 8 teams from 2008 to 2010 had a 1st round RB as their starter.

Ben Jarvis Green-Ellis was a 1st round pick?

Quote:

Sorry it took so long to get back to this. After reading this I decided to do a little digging and went back through the last 10 seasons and found every 1000 yard rusher. Then I found what round they were picked in.

There were 74 different players who had 167 thousand yard seasons
31 First Rounders had 87 seasons
14 Second 32 seasons
12 Third 24 seasons
4 Fourth 8 seasons
1 Fifth 3 seasons
2 Sixth 2 seasons
3 Seventh 3 seasons
7 Undrafted 12 seasons

Excluding 2011 Draft picks:
22 of 31 First Rounder had multiple
8 of 14 Second
7 of 12 Third
3 of 4 Fourth
1 of 1 Fifth
0 of 2 Sixth
0 of 3 Seventh
4 of 7 Undrafted

30 of 45 first and second rounders had multiple, 15 of 29 third through undrafted had multiple.

Nice work, but a RB who makes the 1000 yard mark is not a good indicator of a good team.

Take Berry Sanders for an example.
How many years did his team make the playoffs? Forget about 1000 yards, he usually lead the League in rushing.

If the Lions had to pick between having Berry Sanders or having Megatron and they can only have one or the other ... I think that I would go with the latter [Calvin Johnston].

2010: As already mentioned, BJGE was an UDFA. The only 1st rounder of the 16 that is with the team that drafted them on that list is Mendenhall.

2009: The team (IND) with 2 first round picks at RB that they themselves made were in the playoffs almost despite those players. That year they ranked last in the NFL with 1294 total (80.9 ypg) rushing yards.

The 31st-ranked team had 10% more rushing yards than IND on the season. That team (SD) also happens to be one of the teams with a first round RB they drafted.

McGahee and Jones were signed as FA and not drafted by those teams.

Chris Wells, the next RB on that list drafted in the first by that team, ran for 793 yards as the AZ running attack ranked 28th in the league in 2009.

While Felix Jones was drafted in the first by the Cowboys, he ran for less than 700 yards that season, as they relied much more heavily on the 4th-round pick Barber.

IMO, Peterson is really the only good example from 2009 as a first-round back to make a major difference for the team that drafted him.

So for the last 3 years, a 1st round RB has made a significant positive impact for 2 of 24 teams in the divisional round of the playoffs. Surprising to me.

Berry Sanders?
Calvin Johnston?

I could understand not getting Darrin Chiaverini or Tshimanga Biakabutuka spelled right.....but Barry Sanders and Calvin Johnson? Sorry....just giving you the business.

Quote:

Berry Sanders?
Calvin Johnston?

I could understand not getting Darrin Chiaverini or Tshimanga Biakabutuka spelled right.....but Barry Sanders and Calvin Johnson? Sorry....just giving you the business.

Thanks,

I'll just pm all my post to you for editing first from now on

Ha ha ha....no need. I many be the worst speller in the history of the world. Sorry, I just laughed at who the names were, two all time greats. But then again, I have trouble spelling Wayne Gretzcy.

Gretzky. {edited}

Green-Ellis was an UDFA, wasn't he?

The Patriots really spread the ball around to everyone, both passing and running the ball. They don't rely on any one guy to do it all.

Also, how many of those guys were with their original teams? I see a lot of free agents.

Tomlinson was drafted by the Chargers, (1st) and played (starter) for the Jets.

Lynch was drafted by the Bills,(1st) and played (starter) for the Seahawks.

Jones was drafted by the Cardinals, (1st) and played (starter) for the Jets.

Turner was drafted by the Chargers, (5th) and played (starter) for the Falcons.

McGahee was drafted by the Bills, (1st) and played (starter)for the Ravens.

James was drafted by the Colts, (1st) and played (starter) for the Cardinals.

Taylor was drafted by the Ravens, (6th) and played for the Vikings and Bears. (backup)

There are .... what .... 5 of your 1st round picks who played for someone other than their original team in a starting capacity. Ellis-Green was an UDFA, as mentioned above.

That might skew the numbers a little.

Sorry.

Quote:

Ha ha ha....no need. I many be the worst speller in the history of the world. Sorry, I just laughed at who the names were, two all time greats. But then again, I have trouble spelling Wayne Gretzcy.

Gretzky. {edited}

No I am sure that I have you beat LOL, Then I went threw 10th grade before I learned that I am dyslexic.

Back to the point of discussion and that I think most would agree that the value today at the RB position is almost an after thought (not really questioned) as to the overall importance to the team.

That's not to say that the running game is of little importance, but rather in the ways you can go about filling that role.

I would argue that a team that is on the cusp is more likely to get more bang for their bucks selecting a RB in the first round, then one trying to build their team around one.

Quote:

Back to the point of discussion and that I think most would agree that the value today at the RB position is almost an after thought (not really questioned) as to the overall importance to the team.

That's not to say that the running game is of little importance, but rather in the ways you can go about filling that role.

I was listening to 660 WFAN NY a couple days ago (Joe Beningo and Evan Roberts (the worst they got on that station at regular time periods)), and they were interviewing Dan Marino.

He's changed my mind a little on Richardson. He said that with today's NFL, there's really no need to run the ball because of the protection that receivers, QBs, and even linemen get. It's become a passing game. He said it's really only important to eat away at the clock and to finish games.

While I kinda disagree, the run is important to keep the defense honest, it has become a major passing league.

It's difficult because I do believe Richardson will immediately come in and become the most talented RB in the NFL besides Peterson (and we dunno if Peterson is healthy or not). Having him would be a great premium, but is it necessary? I dunno.

It could make life easier for our QB's as he sets up the play-action and commands defenses to account for him. Unfortunately, I don't really see an Elite WR and I'm not sure RG3 is an Elite QB. I wanted Matt Barkley, but as usual, the Browns get the short end of the stick and he doesn't come out.

It's just a tough situation. I do know that if our FO has complete confidence in RG3, I'd like to pick him up. That position is absolutely vital in today's NFL. But if not, looking for a trade down might be a good option. That or Claiborne.

But it's tricky to go against Richardson, I mean the guy has HOF talent, and that's pretty good to get no matter what position they play

TIM!

Quote:

But it's tricky to go against Richardson, I mean the guy has HOF talent, and that's pretty good to get no matter what position they play

I am not trying to be argumentative here, but I would not say that with any certainty that Richardson, Luck or any other prospect is a sure fire HOF.

Also Bama has a strong running attack year in and year out no matter who they have filling that role ... Are they good talents? Yes that has something to do with it for sure, but it's also an attitude and a commitment to that end.

Marino might want to check his own career before he says that RBs do not matter. He probably just wants to say that he was ahead of his time

cut to Boomer nailing him on-air by asking him how many SuperBowl rings he has (and the hilarious after-effect laugh that Boomer has just as many)

Quote:

He's changed my mind a little on Richardson. He said that with today's NFL, there's really no need to run the ball because of the protection that receivers, QBs, and even linemen get. It's become a passing game. He said it's really only important to eat away at the clock and to finish games.

While I kinda disagree, the run is important to keep the defense honest, it has become a major passing league.

Exactly. It used to be "run to set up the pass", now it's "pass to set up the pass and run to keep defenses honest". The rules have so skewed things in favor of passing that it would be foolish not to fix our passing game as a priority over our running game.

All but 4 teams this year either passed more than they threw or were even in the ratio. Even the "running teams" don't run that much. Denver's ratio was the most skewed towards the run (and why wouldn't it be with Tebow at the helm) and they were only 56/44 run. Conversely, half the league is skewed over 56/44 towards the pass.

It's pretty clear that running is losing a lot of importance as years go by with these rule changes... just another reason why I can't see us going Richardson with #4.

Good time to mention that these rules SUCK...I hate them, they have made the NFL an Madden-arcade passing league, so that some clueless homers can scream "TOUCHDOWN" and buy more nfl.com merchandise

Anybody else noticed that refs called the PO games "the old" way? I can't remember many PIs or flag football roughing the QB penalties and there was a lot of not called contact downfield as well as lots of grabbing on the LOS....it was much more fun and if they would call reg season games like that the run would become more important again

That tells me that if we wnt to make the playoffs we should find a FA Rb that is a former 1st round pick and sign him.

Quote:

Good time to mention that these rules SUCK...I hate them, they have made the NFL an Madden-arcade passing league, so that some clueless homers can scream "TOUCHDOWN" and buy more nfl.com merchandise

Anybody else noticed that refs called the PO games "the old" way? I can't remember many PIs or flag football roughing the QB penalties and there was a lot of not called contact downfield as well as lots of grabbing on the LOS....it was much more fun and if they would call reg season games like that the run would become more important again

I whole heartedly agree, but the rules are what they are today and we are not going back to yesteryear.

My take on Richardson is if he is the best player available then you got to take him period.

Quote:

Good time to mention that these rules SUCK...I hate them, they have made the NFL an Madden-arcade passing league, so that some clueless homers can scream "TOUCHDOWN" and buy more nfl.com merchandise

Anybody else noticed that refs called the PO games "the old" way? I can't remember many PIs or flag football roughing the QB penalties and there was a lot of not called contact downfield as well as lots of grabbing on the LOS....it was much more fun and if they would call reg season games like that the run would become more important again

I agree with you, but with how well the NFL is doing in TV ratings, I don't see it changing back anytime soon.

NRTU, Gopher.

After reading all this, I do find it very interesting how the twists and turns of Richardson became differing opinions based on different criteria.

First, Daman, I'm late answering your question, though Deep handled most of it. To clarify what I meant when I said RB's are the easiest position to scout and therefore their hit rates are much higher early on, I'm not speaking of the concept of players taken early being better overall than those taken later. I was speaking more about the the hit rate of RB's taken early compared to other positions. Since RB's are easier to project than QB's, the hit rate of early RB's will be higher than QB's. The intent is to note that Richardson is probably the safest guy in the draft. Taking him, while not fixing bigger holes, would be a wise investment with our 1st rounder, and in case people aren't keeping score, we've pretty much stunk with 1st rounders. The last true "no-brainer" was Thomas. He wasn't the sexy pick, just the right one. Now I'm not advocating taking Richardson over anyone else, but I am of the opinion that he's as safe as it gets in this draft. That's worth something, and I wouldn't be unhappy if we got him.

The statistical work is very thought-provoking. Thanks.

Some don't want Richardson because there's a theory that says it's easy to find RB's. While I would be quite content with Richardson, I am of the opinion that it isn't hard to find RB's. I'm also of the opinion that even if we don't resign Hillis, we can still rather easily find a solid guy to fill the position without spending the #4 pick in the draft in the process. We've done it with Hillis and we did it with Droughns. Many of the teams listed have/had 'backs who were acquired from other teams. It really is an easy position to fill, especially since the league is a passing league like never before....

...And that point leads to another theory that says teams with great RB's aren't necessarily great teams. Unfortunately, that's correct, though it obviously makes perfect sense. RB's are interchangeable and the league doesn't revolve around them anymore. This naturally means teams don't have to invest heavily in the position, and as it pertains to us and Richardson, the #4 in the entire draft IS paying a high price for a RB. It's a legit point.

So where's the middle ground here? To me, it comes back to something I stated before: I wouldn't mind paying a premium to be assured that a player is going to succeed. Richardson is so talented that I wouldn't mind paying the price to acquire him. Sure, we have a big need at QB. Sure, we have a big need at WR. Beyond that, we do have needs at other positions, but IMHO they aren't as critical as QB, WR, and RB. RG3 has a huge bust-factor along with his tremendous upside. Blackmon isn't the physical specimen that more recent early 1st rounders have been, and WR has a much higher bust factor than RB's. That leaves Richardson, who is a complete back with no holes in his game.

Granted, I'm rambling here a bit (yeah, what else is new!

) but as I view our top needs versus the top potential guys, it looks like our biggest needs represent the biggest bust-factors in descending order:

QB: RG3
WR: Blackmon
RB: Richardson

In most seasons I'm an advocate for trading down, but not this year. Once we get past the top guys at these three positions, there's a rather substantial drop-off in talent. I know about guys like Tannehill and Floyd, but we REALLY need to hit a winner with our first pick, and I don't know that trading down does what we need when we've still got #22 sitting there.

It's an absolutely CRITICAL decision for Heckert, but it's a nice problem to have. As much as I like Griffin, I absolutely know he has the Mike Vick syndrome where in spite of his speed, he has no natural instinct on how to avoid big hits, and in the NFL, he'll be facing much bigger and much faster guys. He's going to miss time, and I hate the idea of having a team that doesn't have it's starting QB. Those teams don't win Super Bowls anymore.

I think I've talked myself out of Griffin. Yup, I just did.

I'll grin if we take him, but I don't think it's the wise investment.

That leaves Blackmon or Richardson. Richardson would have more impact IMHO, but Blackmon would solve a big issue. He looks like the real deal.

Hmmm...

j/c

The Lawfirm 1st round thing was a copy/paste mistake. I know he was a UDFA.

The conversation started that RBs are a dime a dozen and can be found anywhere. I've produced plenty of evidence that after the 2nd round the likelihood of you finding a RB that will produce consistently drops considerably.

I'm not sure why so many of you are hung up on the "success" of UDFA recently. In the past 10 years, only 6 UDFA RBs have rushed for 1000 yards (I'm well aware of the fact that 1000 doesn't mean what it used to). A quick check found a total of 32 UDFA RBs signed to teams last season alone. Even a conservative estimate of 25 a year for the past 10 years gives you 250 total, and a success rate of less than 3%.

Just like OT said above, I'm not advocating taking Richardson over anyone. I'm not even talking about taking him if Hillis is resigned. But if the top of the first falls Luck, RG3, Kalil like most think it will, and Hillis isn't resigned; do you really want to go into next season with Hardesty/Oby/Jackson/Smith/low draft pick as the RB?

If both QBs are gone before the 4th pick, I wouldn't be surprised if the pick was Richardson/Blackmon.

Ytown-

I know that some of those guys weren't drafted by the teams they started for, not sure how that changes anything. It still shows that 1st round RBs produce consistently better. Since 2001 there have been more 1000 yard rushers drafted in the 1st round than 3rd through UDFA combined.

LT had 8 1000 seasons with the Chargers before going to the Jets
Lynch had 2 1000 yard seasons with the Bills
McGahee had 2 almost 3 1000 seasons with the Bills
James had 5 almost 6 1000 seasons with the Colts before having 2 more with Cards
Thomas Jones had 2 1000 seasons with the Bears before joining the Jets and having 3 more

All the playoff teams knew who they were getting when the picked up these backs in FA/trade, all of them had produced prior to being on the playoff team. Jones was the only one that didn't produce for his drafted team, but he wasn't really given the chance (never received more than 140 carries in a year before Chicago).

Th point is that you can find RBs in free agency who can fit into a team and help them in the playoffs.

Nothing more, nothing less.

I think that this team had far, far bigger needs than at RB. I would hate to be like the Vikings or Jaguars ... with this great RB who gets us nowhere.

Jones-Drew was the best rusher in the NFL this past season. LeSean McCoy was 4th. Lynch was 7th. Jackson was 9th. Matthews was 10th.

Their teams were a combined 30-50.

A great RB is no guarantee of anything these days except that you'll run for a lot of yards.