DawgTalkers.net Forums The Archives 2015 NFL Season The NFL Draft 2015 Position Review: Running Backs

I can't say I'm much better. I do/did watch college football, but I can't say I'm fluid. I give Steve kudos for his posts they helped.

Overall, I'm not thrilled with this draft. My assessment you take any cream you can grab here. I don't think it is as bad as 2013. I see three guys I think are worthy and that is Gurley (I'll admit I didn't sponsor at first because of the undervalued position), Trae Waynes, or Marcus Peters. I'm not big on receivers, but I like DeVante Parker.

If I look across the board, Gurley seems to me to be the best at his position. You compare him with others in prior drafts and he'll rank high if not tops.

That's a valid point, bleeds.

I'm not saying I am right. I was just offering my opinion.

I don't think the that Crowell and West are similar to Peterson. LOL. I am not that stupid.

I was just offering answers to your questions.

Again, I am not saying I am right. Just offering my take. Hell bugs, I was a RB in high school and college. I love the position. It kinda hurts me that RBs are now so undervalued.

I really don't think it is because the position is important, but instead, I think the MAIN reason is that there are just so many good ones. Hell bugs, today you got guys who are 30 pounds heavier than I was running the same 40 times I did, and I was considered a burner back in the day.

It's a different game.

And as much as it pains me I do value your opinion

Thanks. And I value yours, as well. But, it doesn't pain me.

J/C

I always laugh when people say backs are a dime a dozen, or can be found easily. Yet for years this has been said and the browns, and other teams, struggle to sign a good starter.

I think they are undervalued, and it is a shame. I don't care how much the league is a passing league, without a good back that can move the chains, teams struggle.

Plus, I would add that Seattle also has a finished defense, and a franchise level QB. They have added pieces in the past couple of years that didn't "have to" contribute right away, because of their overall talent and depth. For them, and knowing the shelf life of the average RB, they could afford to take one higher than most teams might.

Is it? Explain Seattle, San Fransisco, and Baltimore these last few years. All three, when successful, have a balanced attack emphasizing a strong run game. Compare these three teams against Green Bay, Denver, and New Orleans. Who is the better?

What about New England?

Being that Cleveland can't solve the QB riddle, what team should Cleveland follow as an example?

I usually wouldn't touch a RB or WR in round 1, and wouldn't touch Gurley at 12. Howver, in a weak draft like this one I think you just about have to go strictly BPA or you end up getting a far inferior prospect that probably doesn't live up to his draft slot. Gurley is the best RB prospect imo since AP, and if he is there at 19 has to be a consideration. There is a real good chance that all of the real 1st round pass rushers are gone by 19 and I don't want to reach on a guy who is a in most years a 2nd/3rd round grade. Gurley is better than any RB on the roster by far, and I would consider him at 19 depending upon who else is available.

Here are my concerns about drafting a 1st round RB as BPA. I don't think BPA is an absolute. I think the specific circumstances of the team shape this decision. Circumstances would include a mix of roster composition, expiring contracts, injuries, scheme, is the team contending or building a contender? I'm sure there are a number of other considerations that I'm not listing but the point is that one team's BPA isn't the same as another team's BPA.

I looked at CBS' draft rankings, they seem as credible as any other. As an example Gurley is #14, Cameron Erving is #24. At pick #19 Gurley and Erving are available. We have two capable backs and one developmental RB. Mack is returning, odds of another injury are probably less than 50% but his opt-out clause (a situation unique to his contract) still looms as a risk. Erviing would undoubtedly compete at RT and his better position is likely at Center. He can even play Guard if necessary and would not be out of consideration at LT with some seasoning. Gurely will likely be a dynamic ball carrier, he might provide some pass protection and he might be a receiving threat out of the backfield. That's the extent of what he offers. If I've missed something in my assessment of what Gurley can do for us I'd like to hear it.

Yes, we want to be a run dominant team I fully acknowledge that. My question is which player helps the team most toward that goal?

Who is the BPA in this scenario?

It depends upon your board. Imo (and again only my opinion) Gurley has a chance to be a superstar in the mold of AP or Lynch, and I don't think Irving is no where near a good a prospect in a normal year being 24. Most pundits have said that this is a draft where there are 6 "elite" prospects, another 9 really good players, and then after 15 you are getting comparable guys in the late 3rd round. So imo you get 2 of the really good guys, and then get a comparable OT in rounds 2/3.

I like Irving, but I don't think he would be a 1st rounder if this draft was a normal one....this is much more like the Mingo draft in 2013 than it is last years draft that was loaded with talent.

I understand what those who disagree are saying, but because of the draft make up this year, I am going strictly BPA and do not care about need whatsoever. In most years I agree with you guys that it is a combination of many things, but this year if you draft for need in round 1 you are getting a far inferior prospect than what you could be taking.

Okay, which of those teams spent a first round choice on their current RB?

Speaking only for myself, as opposed to you or anyone else. Yes anyone can make an argument in support of their preferred prospect. Admittedly I do happen to value Erving enough to select him at 19. If it were Randy Gregory I'm likely to feel the same way. So its not exclusively a Gurley vs. Erving argument. The team context in which the selection is made does make a great deal of difference to me.

I will say an exceptional OL is not going to excite the imagination like a skill player. Erving, however, was rated a first round OT before he made the switch to Center. He then became the number 1 Center prospect. To me that says he's more than just a guy. Again context is crucial to this decision.

Let me save you some time, bugs.

Seattle's starter is Lynch. He was acquired in a trade for a 4th and 5th round choice. This was quite awhile ago during a time when RBs had more value than they do now.

Who is Baltimore's starter? Do you even know? Whomever it is was certainly not a first round pick.

Carlos Hyde is going to start in SF. He was picked near the bottom of the second round.

Wanna keep arguing?

I'm not sure why this makes a difference? Did any of these teams pass over an AP type RB drafting their RB?

Seattle traded for Lynch. SF and Ravens drafted Gore and Rice in the second round. Again, I don't recall the RB ranking during those years.

Wait! What?

You are not sure WHY it makes a difference? I clearly argued that you can obtain RBs in a variety of ways and not have to overspend on them. You specifically challenged that opinion.

I show you proof of how the three teams you mentioned did NOT spend a high first round pick on their current RB and you say.............you are not sure how it matters?

Come on, bugs!

Yes. Ravens drafted Jamal Lewis in the first round as fifth pick in the draft. I believe Lewis was still the starter when they took Rice. Yea, rules were a little different, but Jamal was ranked pretty high when taken. They didn't pass up a star RB.

Year Ravens took Rice they needed a QB drafting Flaco.

Yes, you can take a good RB anytime. I thought we were talking AP like. You haven't explained where it makes sense passing on AP obtaining equal value later.

Agree on Gregory....but he would have never slipped to 19 had he not showed up high at the combine..lol. I mean how can you screw up that bad on the biggest interview of your life. Therefore, although I think his talent is definitely 19 worthy, I just can't fathom the Browns taking a chance on him after the Gordon and Manziel fiasco.

What? Lewis? That was back in the day.

I clearly said the game has changed.

bugs, you're wrong on this one. Just let it go.

I'm sorry you didn't define current as being the last year or two.

If the Browns continue thinking your way, QB or irrelevant. It won't matter about dysfunctional. They'll keep rebuilding until someday they get lucky. Obviously the game changed there are no other options.

I do like how you side step the question how a team gets a RB other than the first round with AP qualities. Can you give some example of RB with these qualities drafted outside the first round last two or three years?

Everything is cyclical. For awhile, everyone thought the TE position was hot stuff. Teams realized you can't find Graham types every year. It looks like we are seeing a bit of low in QBs. WRs become the hot item. In order to succeed, teams must adapt. You keep doing what everyone else is doing you simply match talent gaining nothing.

Yeah, Gregory is a special case. I mentioned him for two reasons. His talent is elite, he's on par with Gurley in that way. His position converges with many of the other considerations I would use to decide the pick. Some might call that a "need" pick. I split the difference and call it a "BPA at a position of need."

This is what I get debating while trying to watch a playoff hockey game!

First, we both know you draft best player available, period. This argument who Seattle and Ravens drafted where is irrelevant. They drafted best what fits their scheme.

Second, what we know about Browns scheme structure. On offense, Pettine wants a strong offensive line with a balanced attack emphasizing the run game. On Defense, Pettine again wants balance with emphases at the corners.

Third, overall this team is slightly below average. What positions have above average (pro bowl) talent? On defense, you have Joe Haden, Donte Whitner, and Tashun Gipson. On offense, Joe Thomas and Alex Mack. If we look at Pettine’s areas he wants emphases he has pro bowlers in the secondary none at running back.

Fourth, where are Browns weakest? Looking at starters I don’t see gaping holes. If I remove a starter, where are they weakest? At receiver, nothing great, there are serviceable pieces. You can say the same at quarterback, running back, and tight end. When I examine the offensive line, I have nothing at left tackle and both guards. As we discovered last year when they moved Greco to center. On defense, I have serviceable pieces in the secondary and defensive line. Remove Mingo or Kruger and it is mission critical. It explains why Mingo played hurt last year.

I determined most vulnerable positions are left tackle, right and left guard, and outside linebackers. I established where Pettine places emphasis. Running back is average nothing there indicating future pro bowler.

When I assess what may be available at #12. I see Shane Ray (OLB), Todd Gurley (RB), Melvin Gordon (RB), and Brandon Scherff (OG/OT). At #19, I see Randy Gregory (OLB), Bud Dupree (DE/OLB), and La’el Collins (OT/OG).

If I had to choose, Todd Gurley at #12 and Gregory at #19 are my best options for a future pro bowler. Whole different argument whether my prediction these guys will be available at that pick.

If I was the front office with the first two picks, I'd avoid people with dark history, especially with drugs, because we already have a bunch of "that" on the team already, most of "that" were also high round picks. Gregory falls into that, I'd avoid him like syphilis.

Another first round pick joke and Farmer will be knee deep in poo. Big draft for him, I'd stay safe and conservative and even if that means trading or taking a less glamour style pick. No more Johnny Manziel, Josh Gordon, Gilbert and etc. Bring in people that have their heads screwed on correctly, please!!

I get it and it is a good argument. This draft is average. Staying conservative adds more average. Browns need to take chances.

Starting to look like the Vikings have indeed put Peterson on the block. If I am the Titans, give up a 2nd for Peterson, trade for Rivers and bam, you are now a legit contender for the AFC crown/.

Is winning an argument so important to you that you are willing to ignore proof?

Seriously, bugs?

I do not see Gurley as the Browns pick. But, Gurley is a multi dimensional back. He would be a major weapon in the passing game. He can take a dump off pass and turn that into big yardage.

His injury history would scare me off the pick though.

I do not see how the Browns could pass on either Danny Shelton or Shane Ray if available.

I like your logic, but Shane Ray scares me. I think he is a loose cannon. I think he is undisciplined. I think he could be a MAJOR bust.

I think we should draft a WR in this first round. I have historically been against drafting more WRs because we have drafted so many of them and I thought they weren't that important.

However, our WRs are poor. The game has changed. I think we should address the position this year.

Thinking about it some more this draft might be about surrounding Johnny with as much offensive play makers as possible to help him and make their choice of QB last year look better.

At 12 they could easily grab the best WR available that drops to them ( Cooper, White, or Parker). Then a RB like Gurley if available at 19 because of his athletic ability to turn short dump offs into long gains.

With more weapons on the field it spreads a defense out and opens space for Johnny to work. He does have a natural ability to make plays when the initial options break down.

At least they would attempt to build a team around their QB investment.

Sorry Vers you saying it doesn't make it right.

Have you ever debated before? You don't always have a winner. Both sides present their view point. It is ok to disagree.

Guys is there a middle or later round back that also excels as a punt returner? Was merely wondering as we still don't have a returner there...If the Browns say somehow land one of the top high end WRs...I can see them perhaps drafting a running back who is maybe more of a quick pass catcher and returner...to serve that need on special teams and to push our running back committee


Say we take on of the top WRs (say Parker Or Strong or whom whoever) I can't really see us picking another WR to serve as a punt retuner as we have Bowe, Hartline, Hawk, Gabriel, Benji (and whomever we draft high) ...

However if we find a taker for trading Benji, I would support it 100% I think he's damaged goods on special teams and shows to much fear...If a team perhaps throws us a late 5th for him...I wouldn't mind Ty Montgomery to use as our bottom WR and primary punt returner

I don't see any DeAnthoyn Thomas type guys available in the draft this year.

Montgomery would be a great late round pick.

Any chance Duke Johnson makes it to the 3rd round or later? I would love to have him as a complement to Crowell and West.

Cannon fodder position as the over-involved JH business cronies say intrusively and non-constructively during film sessions they shouldn't be at...

j/c

This is an interesting article. Don't get to hung up it is geared toward fantasy football. It breaks down running back's YPC numbers between base and nickle defenses. I thought about coping the article here but there are graphs.

Impact of Defensive Packages on Yards Per Carry – 2015 Mike Clay | April 23, 2015

Pro Football Focus is not geared toward fantasy football. Many teams in the league have private contracts with the company to do independent research.

I posted the same article in the Pure Football thread. It is very interesting. Teams basically knew we were running the ball because of the personnel we had on the field, which is why our running backs faced base defenses most of the time.

In the end, I don't know what I would have done differently. Spreading the field when your QBs are crap doesn't do much for your running backs.

J/C

If Gurley is there at #19, I'd take him. Yes he had an injury, but let's not forget that it's a violent game and anybody could get injured at any time. Gurley is a freak who has breakaway speed unlike any RB on the Browns roster. He's also big, physical, can return kicks, and can receive out of the backfield. I think people are thinking themselves out of a talent like Gurley to either make themselves feel smarter than the room by choosing a lineman or putting too much stock into an injury which could affect any player at any time. Gurley is special and would make an immediate impact for the offense.

For me, it's a simple decision. If the best running back in the draft is available when you're picking at #19, you're using a heavy dose of running in your offense, and your QB is Josh McCown, take the damn guy and don't look back.

There's a difference between the possibility of an injury, which you are right can happen to anyone, and having an injury. I like Gurley, and if his medical all checks out I wouldn't be horribly upset if we picked him at 19. However, I'm hesitant to use the pick on him not knowing how the injured knee responds to live game action or at the least some contact. I think West and Crow are serviceable now with upside. Why take the risk of him not being the same post injury without much/any evidence?