Excellent argument AGAINST drafting a 1st Round RB

[JMF2006]

19 hours ago, MrSarcasm said:

This day and age I would argue that the RB postion is the least valuable postion in the NFL.

 

It could be the punter on this team

 

Remember when Moorman was our MVP  

 

Great 8

[mjt328]

This was an excellent article.  For anyone making their argument without taking the time to read it, I definitely think you should go back and reconsider.

There are multiple reasons why modern NFL teams are foolish to draft Running Backs in the first round, and this touches on quite a few.

 

Looking around the NFL, there are plenty of good RBs.  But outside of Derrick Henry (who was a 2nd Round Pick himself), I can't think of any who are truly difference makers.  As the article mentioned, teams see virtually no change in Win-Loss record with their star RB playing or with him out of the lineup.  A great example is Christian McCaffrey.  The Panthers went 5-11 with him playing 16 games.  They went 5-11 with him playing 3 games.  

 

 

RB is also one of the easiest positions to find solid starters in the mid/late rounds:

• Just for comparison... as of this moment, 60% of the current starting Quarterbacks were drafted in the 1st Round.  That number will almost certainly jump to over 70-75% following this year's draft, and depending on whether Jameis Winston or Taysom Hill win the starting job in New Orleans. 
• The stat is almost identical for Left Tackles drafted in the 1st Round (around 60%). 
• Positions like Edge Rusher, Cornerback and Wide Receiver are around 35-45% drafted in the 1st Round.

For RBs, that number is currently less than 20%.  It could rise or drop, depending on what happens next Thursday.

Smart GMs know the sweet spot for RBs is the 2nd-3rd Round.  I think Brandon Beane understands this, and will continue looking to upgrade the position with Day 2 picks or by addressing the O-Line first.

 

[Negan]

Sign me up for BPA with our first round pick, if that happens to be a RB then so be it.

 

This pick is not going to make or break the Bills winning the SB this year 

[mjt328]

47 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

I'll ask again, why do OC's run such a huge chunk of the Offense through the least important position on the roster?  Is a rushing 1st down less important than a passing 1st down?  What about TDs? Buffalo got 31% of it's 1st downs rushing last year.  KC got 29%. The SB champs got 25% of theirs rushing.   But the position RB is of minimal importance on the roster?  Why do they use it so much?  Simple question.

 

The Browns use a committee of Chubb (1067 yards) and Hunt (841 yards)---but to them RB is the least important position on the roster?  Go back in time:  late 80's Raiders--the RB committee of Bo Jackson and Marcus Allen.  Both not important because they shared the job?  Together they were not important ( "least important") for that Offense?  You like "1960"?  How about the committee of Jim Taylor and Paul Hornung?  Least important Packers HOFers ever? How about Czonka/Mercury Morris/Jim Kiick?  RB was the most  minimally important position to those "perfect" SB Dolphins, because they needed 3 of them?

 

 

As a whole, the "rushing attack" does play an important role in the offense.

Even on teams that pass most of the time, it helps keep the defense honest when deciding how to stack the line of scrimmage.

The argument is more about how much value we should place in the individual "star" running back.

 

Using your Cleveland example... do the Browns really lose much when Nick Chubb is out?  If he was traded away, and they just rolled with Kareem Hunt and a new 3rd Round draft pick, would there be a significant change in the Win-Loss record?  Of course there is no way to know for sure.  But based on statistics compiled over the last decade, the suggestion is probably no.

 

Recent history shows that even when you draft a superstar RB (Christian McCaffrey, Ezekiel Elliott, Saquon Barkley, Josh Jacobs for example) those players make almost no difference in the Win/Loss record when they are in the lineup.  Recent history shows that superstar RBs generally usually threaten a holdout after Season 3, get a big contract and then see an almost immediate big drop in production (Todd Gurley, Melvin Gordon, Elliott).  Recent history suggests that superstar RBs can be easily found in later rounds (Derrick Henry, Nick Chubb, Alvin Kamara, Dalvin Cook, Johnathan Taylor). 

 

All of this tells me that drafting a 1st Round RB is just not smart business.

 

Edited April 21, 2021 by mjt328

[Sherlock Holmes]

You draft McCaffrey every time...

[dave mcbride]

7 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

While it's true that the value of the 5th year option has been diminished...........it's still important with key positions..........which is of course where you should be using your first round picks on anyway.

 

The most obvious example is Josh Allen.    That option definitely should be picked up.   Even if it were the same value as a franchise tag........it's not the franchise tag so you could in theory pay Josh his option and then pay almost the same money in 2023 on the first year you used the franchise tag on him instead of having that value escalate quickly the way it did for Dallas with Dak because they only had him under contract for 4 seasons because he wasn't a 1st round pick.

 

I get your point about THAT type of player being one you extend though............to which I would counter with a guy like Dion Dawkins.    Suppose he were a first round pick...........played as he has.......admirably at LT but wasn't a Pro Bowler or top of the league guy........having that fifth year option at LESS than the tag amount provides leverage to negotiate a more team friendly deal.   

 

 It's kind of the opposite of like what is happening with Tremaine Edmunds........he plays a lesser value position in the NFL.......collected a couple Pro Bowls despite not really being a top 8-10 MLB because all the stud MLB's are in the NFC........and now his option is worth more than he probably is to the team.  

 

 

Teams actually still do care about the fifth year option, which only makes sense assuming you trust your judgment about whom you’re drafting. If they draft the next Stefon Gilmore, you can bet they’ll use that option. From Beane himself yesterday:

 

‘1. The Bills’ spot at No. 30 in the first round is a good one to attract offers. Teams may want to grab another first-round pick due to a run at a position and because first-round picks can be kept under contract for an extra year, via the fifth-year option that teams are allowed to apply to the contracts of first round picks.

 

“I would be surprised if we don’t get some calls for 30,” Beane said. “We just have to make a judgement about how we see the board and if we’re willing to give it up.

“I would definitely take this pick if there's a guy that we're excited about and we've got a good solid first round grade on,” Beane said of No. 30. “We're very comfortable staying at 30 and getting that fifth-year option. But again we'll just kind of listen to the board and see what happens.”’

https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/draft-deals-scouting-problems-and-more-from-brandon-beanes-pre-draft-news-briefing/article_f627bb96-a219-11eb-93f7-e77fce545469.html

[DaggersEOD]

13 hours ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

The RB position accounts for 30-60% of an NFL team's Offensive plays.  So every team leans heavily on the position, by design.  I feel dumb pointing out how dumb it was to claim it's the least important position on the roster.

 

The other poster is intermittently conflating "the position of RB" with individual RBs.  This is why he embarrasses himself with his post.

30 - 60% offensive plays running the ball, but the other 70 - 40% they are still an integral part of the O. 
 

If they aren’t running the ball, they are blocking for the QB, running a route or, if they’re effective enough, freezing LBs/Safeties with play action. 
 

If they are good enough, he also affects how the D approaches the O. A good RB forces D’s into heavier sets, making the passing O more effective.

 

He would also affect the O’s blocking effectiveness. A good RB forces the D to respect the run. Meaning they can’t solely pass rush. This uncertainty gives an O-line a moment’s advantage as the D-line has to react to the play before making their move. 
 

IMO, we can’t just use “toting the rock” as the only metric we use when evaluating the value a RB brings to an O. 
 

The article is compelling and I don’t think people are wrong by holding an opinion on either side of this debate. But, I personally think a RB on this specific team is a force multiplier and having the chance to pick the one you want vs the one that falls to you is not a bad play. 

[Don Otreply]

11 hours ago, Augie said:

 

I was hoping to run unopposed........   🤷‍♂️

No way man, I’m in it to win it... 😁

[Don Otreply]

11 hours ago, In Summary said:

Morse is a hit away from Feliciano moving to center and some assembly of Lamp, Ford, Boettger, etc. manning the guard positions.  

And that is an example of my point, 👍

[Mr. WEO]

9 minutes ago, mjt328 said:

 

As a whole, the "rushing attack" does play an important role in the offense.

Even on teams that pass most of the time, it helps keep the defense honest when deciding how to stack the line of scrimmage.

The argument is more about how much value we should place in the individual "star" running back.

 

Using your Cleveland example... do the Browns really lose much when Nick Chubb is out?  If he was traded away, and they just rolled with Kareem Hunt and a new 3rd Round draft pick, would there be a significant change in the Win-Loss record?  Of course there is no way to know for sure.  But based on statistics compiled over the last decade, the suggestion is probably no.

 

Recent history shows that even when you draft a superstar RB (Christian McCaffrey, Ezekiel Elliott, Saquon Barkley, Josh Jacobs for example) those players make almost no difference in the Win/Loss record when they are in the lineup.  Recent history shows that superstar RBs generally usually threaten a holdout after Season 3, get a big contract and then see an almost immediate big drop in production (Todd Gurley, Melvin Gordon, Elliott).  Recent history suggests that superstar RBs can be easily found in later rounds (Derrick Henry, Nick Chubb, Alvin Kamara, Dalvin Cook, Johnathan Taylor). 

 

All of this tells me that drafting a 1st Round RB is just not smart business.

 

 

You can make the same argument for nearly every individual position on defense, or O-line for that matter.

 

I'm not arguing that the pick should be RB in the first round (or whether should re-sign them to big contracts).  I'm ridiculing the concept that the position of RB is the least important on the team. Whether single or in tandem the RB(s) play a huge role in the Offense.  Even a single mediocre RB is important to his  Offense.     

 

As for McCaffery and Barkley--they were drafted high to crappy teams that needed playmakers.  Both of them are.  Mccaffery has been the Panthers best player since they drafted him. In 2019, he had almost 1400 yards rushing with 15 TDs and 57 1st downs (of the team's 69 total rushing 1st downs), 1000 yards receiving and another  4 TDs and 58 more 1st downs.  In total, he accounted for 2400 yards, 19 TDs, 115 1st downs, and a whopping 403 touches (40% of the total number of Offensive snaps)---all in "the least important position on the roster".

 

With Barkley, the Giants went from 3 wins to 5 his rookie year, he ran for 1300 yards, 50 1st downs 11 TDs (plus 4 receiving and 721 yards)--that's over 2000 yards of offense from "the least important position on the roster".... in his rookie year. 

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, mjt328 said:

As the article mentioned, teams see virtually no change in Win-Loss record with their star RB playing or with him out of the lineup.

 

This is true with any position other than QB. I remember reading once that if JJ Watt in his prime missed a game, Vegas would only knock half a point off of Houston's spread. Does that mean elite pass rushers aren't important? Football is still a team game so one player missing a game is never going to make a huge difference.

 

Same goes for the argument that elite RBs haven't gotten their teams to a championship. Again, this is already true of most elite non-QBs in the league. The simple counterargument is that if the Bills had a Derrick Henry or Christian McCaffrey last year we would have been a better team with a better chance of beating the Chiefs. If you try to argue otherwise you aren't being realistic.

 

As for the argument that late 1st round RBs recently haven't been very good players, that is again true of every other position. Look at pass rushers drafted in the range of #30. The only hit is TJ Watt. It's hard to find good players at that spot. If Henry and Chubb had been taken at the bottom of the 1st instead of in the 2nd they would have been good picks. You can't discount them just because teams misvalued them.

 

In 2016 (Derrick Henry's draft year) teams at the bottom of the 1st round picked superstars like Artie Burns, Paxton Lynch, Joshua Garnett, Robert Nkemdiche, and Vernon Butler. Any one of those teams would be better off with Henry right now.

 

The article uses Michel and Penney as examples of late 1st round RBs that didn't work out. Well Chubb was drafted that same year at pick 35. The problem wasn't taking a RB at the end of the 1st, it was taking the wrong one.

 

So overall I feel like you could replace the RB portion of the article with any other non-QB position and come away with the same conclusions.

Edited April 21, 2021 by HappyDays

[Hapless Bills Fan]

14 hours ago, WideNine said:

 

Thanks for the info...

 

I thought the book on Mongo was his run blocking was solid if not spectacular and he was a finisher, but he seemed off balance and was lunging a lot down the stretch.

 

The drop in play would make more sense if he was playing through an injury.

 

I do like him as a depth guy that can be serviceable and cover a lot of positions in a pinch and he clearly wants to be here.

 

It got posted elsewhere but there was an article in some fitness magazine about Feliciano coming back from injury

https://www.muscleandfitness.com/athletes-celebrities/winning-strategy-jon-feliciano-kept-pounding-after-tearing-pec/

 

Quote

“I’ve had lots of bumps and bruises with football, but nothing ever made me throw up from the pain,” Feliciano recalled. “I was telling my spotter not to touch the bar, and as I was pushing, I felt the ligament in my pec snap. It felt like slow motion, even though it happened fast.”

Two days later, Feliciano underwent surgery and was placed on Injured Reserve in September. It also meant nearly two months away from weight training.

 

Quote

“I still feel like I have a lot to prove,” Feliciano says. “I didn’t feel healthy at all till now. I’m still. Like until the till now I’m still doing rehab for my circumstance, you know, getting that right. Uh, so I have a lot to prove. I want to prove what kind of player I am when I’m, when I’m healthy.

 

Quote

It took about six weeks before I was able to pick up a dumbbell. We started with a 10 pounds on my bad pec, and 90 with the other. That went on for about two weeks. About eight weeks then I started doing like six, 50 pounds, 60 pounds. But honestly, I didn’t feel very strong the whole season.

 

From what I saw, Feliciano was getting beat at times with footwork especially on stunts.  Judging by the look in his eyes in a couple of post-game pressers, I would say he was getting pretty doped up to be able to play.  That can affect reaction times all around.

[prissythecat]

17 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

...

 

So overall I feel like you could replace the RB portion of the article with any other non-QB position and come away with the same conclusions.

 

+1

Edited April 21, 2021 by prissythecat

[auburnbillsbacker]

21 hours ago, MrSarcasm said:

This day and age I would argue that the RB postion is the least valuable postion in the NFL.

It's very important but there is a lot of talent available so there isn't a need to take one early.  

[TBBills]

1 hour ago, Sherlock Holmes said:

You draft McCaffrey every time...

Exactly why draft a QB when you can draft a fantasy football stud...

[DaBillsFanSince1973]

59 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

This is true with any position other than QB. I remember reading once that if JJ Watt in his prime missed a game, Vegas would only knock half a point off of Houston's spread. Does that mean elite pass rushers aren't important? Football is still a team game so one player missing a game is never going to make a huge difference.

 

Same goes for the argument that elite RBs haven't gotten their teams to a championship. Again, this is already true of most elite non-QBs in the league. The simple counterargument is that if the Bills had a Derrick Henry or Christian McCaffrey last year we would have been a better team with a better chance of beating the Chiefs. If you try to argue otherwise you aren't being realistic.

 

As for the argument that late 1st round RBs recently haven't been very good players, that is again true of every other position. Look at pass rushers drafted in the range of #30. The only hit is TJ Watt. It's hard to find good players at that spot. If Henry and Chubb had been taken at the bottom of the 1st instead of in the 2nd they would have been good picks. You can't discount them just because teams misvalued them.

 

In 2016 (Derrick Henry's draft year) teams at the bottom of the 1st round picked superstars like Artie Burns, Paxton Lynch, Joshua Garnett, Robert Nkemdiche, and Vernon Butler. Any one of those teams would be better off with Henry right now.

 

The article uses Michel and Penney as examples of late 1st round RBs that didn't work out. Well Chubb was drafted that same year at pick 35. The problem wasn't taking a RB at the end of the 1st, it was taking the wrong one.

 

So overall I feel like you could replace the RB portion of the article with any other non-QB position and come away with the same conclusions.

excellent post!

[HappyDays]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

Teams actually still do care about the fifth year option, which only makes sense assuming you trust your judgment about whom you’re drafting. If they draft the next Stefon Gilmore, you can bet they’ll use that option.

 

But meanwhile there's a thread on this board with an ongoing debate about whether it is prudent to pick up Tremaine Edmunds' 5th year option. Which is crazy because I feel like he is the exact type of player the 5th year option is designed for - someone that clearly has a lot of potential but isn't yet worthy of a long term extension. Still there is a question if he is worth using the 5th year option on. And everyone agrees if Allen is given the 5th year option it will be a formality on the way to a long term extension. So I wouldn't make any draft pick with the 5th year option on my mind. Draft the BPA at a position of need and worry about the rest later.

[Hapless Bills Fan]

21 hours ago, Rigotz said:

https://www.nbcsports.com/edge/article/offseason-research/teams-are-never-first-round-rb-away

 

This is a fantastic write-up on why Playoff teams are "never a first round RB away from Super Bowl."

Obviously, very relevant to the Bills and they are specifically mentioned in this article.

 

This also doesn't consider the draft capital we've already spent on Running Backs recently.

If you're one of the folks clamoring for Najee or Etienne, give this a read.

 

So first of all, Thanks to the OP for posting a thought-provoking article.  Good read.

 

Something like ~50% of all positions drafted in the top of the 1st round pan out.  ~30% in the later half of the 1st/top of the 2nd.  And that's just whether they become a solid starter, not whether they become a difference-making star.  So this has to be looked at properly in a sort of Net Present Value context of "what are the odds of getting an impact player if you draft ANY position in the first round?"  How would the article look if analyzing the impact of WR or QB or DE or CB drafted in the 1st round over the last 11 years, ESPECIALLY if the assessment went into 2nd contracts vs being traded/cut and so forth?

 

Of the RBs he names, 7 were drafted at the top of the 1st round, 4 were drafted mid-round, and 9 were drafted at the bottom of the first round.  So looked at in the above "overall odds of success" context, you would expect ~9 good players out of 20 1st round draftees.  So when he says

Quote

Most (15 of 20) haven’t even led their team in YPC as the primary starter
Half (10 of 20) haven’t even gained above average yards per carry
Most (10 of 15) of those eligible haven’t been good enough to receive a second contract

I'm not sure what the 1st statement means - a run-heavy team could have a good RB already.  But we expect 9 NFL-caliber players out of 20, so if half HAVE gained above-avererage YPC, that would be a bit better than expected.

I think pretty much all of us would agree that RB is a very dependent position.  The RB's success depends upon the OL being able to open holes and the QB being able to mount enough of a downfield passing attack to keep teams from crowding the box.  If the team is not "set" at QB, it makes little sense to bring in an RB, as the Giants did with Saquon Barkley.  On the other hand, there's not much question that Zeke Elliott was a huge factor in the Cowboys turning it around from 4-12 to 13-3 and playoffs in 2016.  I would argue (I think it would be more debated) that Edwards-Helaire added a needed element to the Chiefs offense - they're still not overall much of a rushing team (27 in attempts last year, 23 in attempts this year), but their MO is to have enough rushing game to pick up the slack when teams manage to stifle their pass attack - and they got almost as many yards out of Edwards-Helaire in 2020 as they did out of two backs combined in 2019.

 

Personally, I give the benefit of the doubt to Beane and company.  I don't think they're going to pull a Nix/Gailey and go into the draft lusting after a particular player like Spiller, thinking he'll make the difference.  Overall I perceive our needs as bigger on D and on OL and would prefer a defensive player, but if they see someone they believe is able to add a missing element at RB at #30, I'm not going to second-guess them.

 

Good read, though, OP, thanks for posting it!

[dave mcbride]

24 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

But meanwhile there's a thread on this board with an ongoing debate about whether it is prudent to pick up Tremaine Edmunds' 5th year option. Which is crazy because I feel like he is the exact type of player the 5th year option is designed for - someone that clearly has a lot of potential but isn't yet worthy of a long term extension. Still there is a question if he is worth using the 5th year option on. And everyone agrees if Allen is given the 5th year option it will be a formality on the way to a long term extension. So I wouldn't make any draft pick with the 5th year option on my mind. Draft the BPA at a position of need and worry about the rest later.

I think QBs are different. I think it's more about players like, say, Stefon Gilmore - a clearly good player at a premier position - whose contractual negotiations are going to be difficult.  The Bills DID pick up his option, and he had his best season as a Bill: https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/G/GilmSt00.htm. The Bills weren't a good team overall, but if they had the coaching/offense of the last couple of seasons, that fifth year from an elite player might win them a game or two more - enough to maybe get them over the hump.  

 

More recently, the Saints picked up Marshon Lattimore's option, which was obviously the right thing to do. With a running back, though, I don't think so. And I tend to view MLBs as the defensive mirror image of RBs -- guys taking tons of hits and not really being game changers. There are a couple who are -- Kuechly certainly was, as is Devin Bush now -- but that's because they can cover. In other words, they're assets in the passing game. The number of RBs who are above replacement level in the passing game is pretty small -- Kamara and McCaffrey come immediately to mind. Kamara in my opinion IS a guy worth keeping (he does so much more than most RBs, like Marshall Faulk), but of course he was a third rounder. LeVeon Bell was another terrific receiver, but his career went completely sideways early on, mostly because of bad decision making on his part.  

Edited April 21, 2021 by dave mcbride

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, dave mcbride said:

Teams actually still do care about the fifth year option, which only makes sense assuming you trust your judgment about whom you’re drafting. If they draft the next Stefon Gilmore, you can bet they’ll use that option. From Beane himself yesterday:

 

‘1. The Bills’ spot at No. 30 in the first round is a good one to attract offers. Teams may want to grab another first-round pick due to a run at a position and because first-round picks can be kept under contract for an extra year, via the fifth-year option that teams are allowed to apply to the contracts of first round picks.

 

“I would be surprised if we don’t get some calls for 30,” Beane said. “We just have to make a judgement about how we see the board and if we’re willing to give it up.

“I would definitely take this pick if there's a guy that we're excited about and we've got a good solid first round grade on,” Beane said of No. 30. “We're very comfortable staying at 30 and getting that fifth-year option. But again we'll just kind of listen to the board and see what happens.”’

https://buffalonews.com/sports/bills/draft-deals-scouting-problems-and-more-from-brandon-beanes-pre-draft-news-briefing/article_f627bb96-a219-11eb-93f7-e77fce545469.html

 

I swear, Beane must sit down before pressers and make himself a cheat sheet of talking points he wants to hit to sow as much confusion and ambiguity as possible into the predictions by other teams of what the Bills are gonna do.  We'll draft at 30 and take the 5th round option, unless we get good offers and the board falls such that we think it's in our favor to traded down.  Then again, if a guy we have a top grade on as a difference-maker falls a bit, we might trade up, too.

 

29 minutes ago, HappyDays said:

 

But meanwhile there's a thread on this board with an ongoing debate about whether it is prudent to pick up Tremaine Edmunds' 5th year option. Which is crazy because I feel like he is the exact type of player the 5th year option is designed for - someone that clearly has a lot of potential but isn't yet worthy of a long term extension. Still there is a question if he is worth using the 5th year option on. And everyone agrees if Allen is given the 5th year option it will be a formality on the way to a long term extension. So I wouldn't make any draft pick with the 5th year option on my mind. Draft the BPA at a position of need and worry about the rest later.

 

It's probably worth noting that the question about Tremaine Edmunds 5th year option does have unusual context, that being the collision between 1) the fact that we drafted 2 1st round picks in 2018 so we have 2 5th year options to consider 2) the huge cap hit from Covid, and Beane's belief that it won't recover much in 2022. 

 

That said, if Edmunds had showed himself more consistently the impact player they expected last season instead of struggling half the year and improving to OK, it still wouldn't be a question.

 

 

[Hapless Bills Fan]

1 hour ago, HappyDays said:

As for the argument that late 1st round RBs recently haven't been very good players, that is again true of every other position. Look at pass rushers drafted in the range of #30. The only hit is TJ Watt. It's hard to find good players at that spot. If Henry and Chubb had been taken at the bottom of the 1st instead of in the 2nd they would have been good picks. You can't discount them just because teams misvalued them.

 

In 2016 (Derrick Henry's draft year) teams at the bottom of the 1st round picked superstars like Artie Burns, Paxton Lynch, Joshua Garnett, Robert Nkemdiche, and Vernon Butler. Any one of those teams would be better off with Henry right now.

 

The article uses Michel and Penney as examples of late 1st round RBs that didn't work out. Well Chubb was drafted that same year at pick 35. The problem wasn't taking a RB at the end of the 1st, it was taking the wrong one.

 

So overall I feel like you could replace the RB portion of the article with any other non-QB position and come away with the same conclusions.

 

Agree.

 

Possibly a bit more of an argument for RB because in general, RBs have a short shelf life in the NFL, but overall, article needs context

[GunnerBill]

27 minutes ago, dave mcbride said:

The number of RBs who are above replacement level in the passing game is pretty small -- Kamara and McCaffrey come immediately to mind. Kamara in my opinion IS a guy worth keeping (he does so much more than most RBs, like Marshall Faulk), but of course he was a third rounder. LeVeon Bell was another terrific receiver, but his career went completely sideways early on, mostly because of bad decision making on his part.  

 

Agreed, Kamara and McCaffrey are not just running backs, they are offensive weapons. Kamara caught 83 balls last year. The only other one I might put in that category (though like McCaffrey he was hurt for past of last season) is Austin Eckler. 

[Mr. WEO]

1 hour ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

It got posted elsewhere but there was an article in some fitness magazine about Feliciano coming back from injury

https://www.muscleandfitness.com/athletes-celebrities/winning-strategy-jon-feliciano-kept-pounding-after-tearing-pec/

 

 

 

 

From what I saw, Feliciano was getting beat at times with footwork especially on stunts.  Judging by the look in his eyes in a couple of post-game pressers, I would say he was getting pretty doped up to be able to play.  That can affect reaction times all around.

 

Narcotics?

[Hapless Bills Fan]

5 minutes ago, Mr. WEO said:

 

Narcotics?

 

That would be my guess.   He just had that look in his eyes - I can't describe it exactly but I know it when I see it.  IKYKWIM.

 

I think there's a reason his teammates voted him the "Ed Block Courage" award, over a guy who played 3 playoff games on a freakin' broken leg fergoshsakes.

[BADOLBILZ]

2 hours ago, HappyDays said:

 

This is true with any position other than QB. I remember reading once that if JJ Watt in his prime missed a game, Vegas would only knock half a point off of Houston's spread. Does that mean elite pass rushers aren't important? Football is still a team game so one player missing a game is never going to make a huge difference.

 

Same goes for the argument that elite RBs haven't gotten their teams to a championship. Again, this is already true of most elite non-QBs in the league. The simple counterargument is that if the Bills had a Derrick Henry or Christian McCaffrey last year we would have been a better team with a better chance of beating the Chiefs. If you try to argue otherwise you aren't being realistic.

 

As for the argument that late 1st round RBs recently haven't been very good players, that is again true of every other position. Look at pass rushers drafted in the range of #30. The only hit is TJ Watt. It's hard to find good players at that spot. If Henry and Chubb had been taken at the bottom of the 1st instead of in the 2nd they would have been good picks. You can't discount them just because teams misvalued them.

 

In 2016 (Derrick Henry's draft year) teams at the bottom of the 1st round picked superstars like Artie Burns, Paxton Lynch, Joshua Garnett, Robert Nkemdiche, and Vernon Butler. Any one of those teams would be better off with Henry right now.

 

The article uses Michel and Penney as examples of late 1st round RBs that didn't work out. Well Chubb was drafted that same year at pick 35. The problem wasn't taking a RB at the end of the 1st, it was taking the wrong one.

 

So overall I feel like you could replace the RB portion of the article with any other non-QB position and come away with the same conclusions.

 

 

 

1) What you don't seem to understand about the "running backs don't move the line" point is why years ago it became important to note in the first place.

 

A top RB handles the ball 30%-40% of his teams offensive snaps in a game...........in theory he has FAR, FAR greater opportunity to individually alter the score/outcome of the game than any other non-QB.      

 

And yet......despite seemingly overwhelming odds that they WOULD be a key deciding factor in the outcome of game.........they have proven NOT to be..........which should be an eye opener.    Instead your take is........"well the guys who don't touch the ball don't move the line either".

 

2) Assuming a better chance to beat the Chiefs because of any individual RB is laughably "on paper" thinking.  Do people learn nothing about what happens to RB's when their team gets behind?    They get taken out of the gameplan entirely.   Derrick Henry is by far the most productive back in the league.    The Titans have made the playoffs the last 3 seasons.....fell behind in the 3 losses........in which he ultimately carried the ball 49 times for a dismal average of 2.8 ypc.     How does that change in KC when the Chiefs are on a 36-0 scoring streak passing the ball for huge yardage plays?   

 

3) It's pretty well known that you aren't likely to get a great pass rusher after the top half of round one...........but the position is definitely A LOT more difficult to fill competently than RB and subsequently far more valuable and expensive to stock.   The difference between a top pass rusher and a JAG is a lot greater than a top producing RB and a JAG RB........which is only a fraction of a yard per carry and is even more dependent on other players than the performance of a pass rusher.   They say edge players and corners are "on an island" because they actually face one-on-one matchups that they can affect with less need for assistance.     

 

4) So if the question is would Vernon Butler drafters Carolina be better off with Derrick Henry or Christian McCaffrey?   The answer is........who cares?  I mean outside of "fantasy" football owners.   Those other teams aren't handicapped because they passed on a RB in round one......they have other issues.

 

5) Nick Chubb is a nice player.........but still his amazing 5.2 ypc career average is not nearly enough to take the ball out of the hands of a QB that throws for nearly 8 yards per attempt like Josh Allen.    Ultimately this is why the running game is devalued.    The value of a pass play dwarfs that of a run play.   Use those early draft assets on key positions that actually advance your passing game........there are other ways to be successful running the ball than drafting a RB early.    It's almost impossible to pass the ball at a high level without elite talent though.  

Edited April 21, 2021 by BADOLBILZ

[Eastport bills]

Why can't we have a feature back that defenses have to devote personnel to and can break long runs and take pressure off our pass heavy offense. If a prospect in the later rounds provides that fine, but Etienne and Harris seem like transcendent talents. Would a Kamara, Nick Chubb, or a McCaffrey be worth a 1st rd pick. I'm only saying if the elite edge rusher or Zaven Collins or one of the top 3 dbs are gone, an Etienne or Harris would be fine.

[BADOLBILZ]

1 hour ago, GunnerBill said:

 

Agreed, Kamara and McCaffrey are not just running backs, they are offensive weapons. Kamara caught 83 balls last year. The only other one I might put in that category (though like McCaffrey he was hurt for past of last season) is Austin Eckler. 

 

Ehh......is 3.8 yards per carry and 8.3 yards per reception really an offensive weapon or still just a RB?    Those are Kamara's averages in 7 career playoff games.   His regular season #'s are better but giving the ball to even the greatest RB is probably a less productive proposition than just chucking it at Gabe Davis..........which should say enough about the relative value of the RB position.

[LABILLBACKER]

On 4/20/2021 at 9:02 AM, Success said:

RB's have been steadily losing 1st round value for a reason.

 

I think most teams are starting to realize that - unless it's a generational type of talent - it's better to just improve the run blocking.  

 

I'd be shocked if the Bills went RB after picking up Breida. I think their plan is to use the backs we have & just try to improve the line & blocking schemes.

 

It's doubtful they go RB at 30. It will be a pass rusher or cb. I think we can buy time with Breida and Moss while evaluating Singletary's future. 

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

20 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

 

 

1) What you don't seem to understand about the "running backs don't move the line" point is why years ago it became important to note in the first place.

 

A top RB handles the ball 30%-40% of his teams offensive snaps in a game...........in theory he has FAR, FAR greater opportunity to individually alter the score/outcome of the game than any other non-QB.      

 

And yet......despite seemingly overwhelming odds that they WOULD be a key deciding factor in the outcome of game.........they have proven NOT to be..........which should be an eye opener.    Instead your take is........"well the guys who don't touch the ball don't move the line either".

 

2) Assuming a better chance to beat the Chiefs because of any individual RB is laughably "on paper" thinking.  Do people learn nothing about what happens to RB's when their team gets behind?    They get taken out of the gameplan entirely.   Derrick Henry is by far the most productive back in the league.    The Titans have made the playoffs the last 3 seasons.....fell behind in the 3 losses........in which he ultimately carried the ball 49 times for a dismal average of 2.8 ypc.     How does that change in KC when the Chiefs are on a 36-0 scoring streak passing the ball for huge yardage plays?   

 

3) It's pretty well known that you aren't likely to get a great pass rusher after the top half of round one...........but the position is definitely A LOT more difficult to fill competently than RB and subsequently far more valuable and expensive to stock.   The difference between a top pass rusher and a JAG is a lot greater than a top producing RB and a JAG RB........which is only a fraction of a yard per carry and is even more dependent on other players than the performance of a pass rusher.   They say edge players and corners are "on an island" because they actually face one-on-one matchups that they can affect with less need for assistance.     

 

4) So if the question is would Vernon Butler drafters Carolina be better off with Derrick Henry or Christian McCaffrey?   The answer is........who cares?  I mean outside of "fantasy" football owners.   Those other teams aren't handicapped because they passed on a RB in round one......they have other issues.

 

5) Nick Chubb is a nice player.........but still his amazing 5.2 ypc career average is not nearly enough to take the ball out of the hands of a QB that throws for nearly 8 yards per attempt like Josh Allen.    Ultimately this is why the running game is devalued.    The value of a pass play dwarfs that of a run play.   Use those early draft assets on key positions that actually advance your passing game........there are other ways to be successful running the ball than drafting a RB early.    It's almost impossible to pass the ball at a high level without elite talent though.  

 

I think the impact of 4.9 YPC and 4.3 YPC is tougher to quantify than a WR who can have a higher YPC (by yards), or who catches a higher % of targets (gets open,makes plays in traffic etc, creates a higher yard per route run).  

[GunnerBill]

9 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

Ehh......is 3.8 yards per carry and 8.3 yards per reception really an offensive weapon or still just a RB?    Those are Kamara's averages in 7 career playoff games.   His regular season #'s are better but giving the ball to even the greatest RB is probably a less productive proposition than just chucking it at Gabe Davis..........which should say enough about the relative value of the RB position.

 

In order to succeed in the playoffs you need to make the playoffs. I don't think an indifferent playoff record invalidates Kamara's impact as a difference maker. 

 

Not I was not arguing that Kamara is worth a 1st round pick, I wasn't, but I think running backs who can be receiving weapons as well do have more value than guys who are just runners. 

[BADOLBILZ]

4 minutes ago, dneveu said:

 

I think the impact of 4.9 YPC and 4.3 YPC is tougher to quantify than a WR who can have a higher YPC (by yards), or who catches a higher % of targets (gets open,makes plays in traffic etc, creates a higher yard per route run).  

 

 

Yeah what isn't hard to quantify at all though is a QB averaging 8 yards per pass attempt.     That encompasses all of the targets.........good and bad.

 

[DCOrange]

26 minutes ago, Eastport bills said:

Why can't we have a feature back that defenses have to devote personnel to and can break long runs and take pressure off our pass heavy offense. If a prospect in the later rounds provides that fine, but Etienne and Harris seem like transcendent talents. Would a Kamara, Nick Chubb, or a McCaffrey be worth a 1st rd pick. I'm only saying if the elite edge rusher or Zaven Collins or one of the top 3 dbs are gone, an Etienne or Harris would be fine.

I will grant that Etienne would be a different type of back for us (though maybe Breida can do some of the same stuff), but regarding Harris (who I view as the better prospect between the two both in general and specifically for our offense), I'm not sure there's much of a difference between him and Moss.

 

Piecing together their scouting reports from Dane Brugler, who had Moss as his #6 RB last year with a 3rd round grade while he has Harris #1 with a 1st-2nd round grade:

 

Moss:

Strengths:

• Elite contact balance, keeps feet moving through contact
• Punishing finisher, bounces off hits like they're nothing
• Agile runner with lateral cut-and-go skills
• Patient, but decisive once the opening appears
• Competitive pass blocker, squares up and slows pass-rushers
• Productive pass catcher
• Creates explosive plays

Weaknesses:

• Average start/stop acceleration
• Not great speed, can be caught from behind
• Durability concerns, suffered a bunch of leg injuries

 

Harris:

Strengths:

• Impressive contact balance
• Aggressive finisher
• Keeps his momentum moving forwards through contact
• Patience at the line of scrimmage but makes strong cuts when the opening appears
• Complete skills as a pass catcher
• Squares up blitzers as a pass blocker
• Only 3 fumbles at Alabama

Weaknesses:

• More quick than sudden as an athlete
• Not great speed, can't run away from defenders
• Doesn't create explosive plays
• Sometimes late to decipher running lanes/runs into his own blockers
• Inconsistent pass blocker
• Some injury concerns with various leg injuries

Their scouting reports read like pretty much identical players with the differences being that Harris fumbled it 3 times compared to Moss' 6, Harris is a better receiver (though it was a strength of Moss's as well), and Moss was the more explosive runner and better pass protector. I don't really see any reason to think Harris is a transcendent talent unless you're similarly high on Moss who we already have.

[BADOLBILZ]

15 minutes ago, GunnerBill said:

 

In order to succeed in the playoffs you need to make the playoffs. I don't think an indifferent playoff record invalidates Kamara's impact as a difference maker. 

 

Not I was not arguing that Kamara is worth a 1st round pick, I wasn't, but I think running backs who can be receiving weapons as well do have more value than guys who are just runners. 

 

 

I think people tend to overuse or misuse hyperbolic terms like "force multiplier" and "weapon" and it exaggerates what the actual value is.

 

                       

[Eastport bills]

51 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

I will grant that Etienne would be a different type of back for us (though maybe Breida can do some of the same stuff), but regarding Harris (who I view as the better prospect between the two both in general and specifically for our offense), I'm not sure there's much of a difference between him and Moss.

 

Piecing together their scouting reports from Dane Brugler, who had Moss as his #6 RB last year with a 3rd round grade while he has Harris #1 with a 1st-2nd round grade:

 

Moss:

Strengths:

• Elite contact balance, keeps feet moving through contact
• Punishing finisher, bounces off hits like they're nothing
• Agile runner with lateral cut-and-go skills
• Patient, but decisive once the opening appears
• Competitive pass blocker, squares up and slows pass-rushers
• Productive pass catcher
• Creates explosive plays

Weaknesses:

• Average start/stop acceleration
• Not great speed, can be caught from behind
• Durability concerns, suffered a bunch of leg injuries

 

Harris:

Strengths:

• Impressive contact balance
• Aggressive finisher
• Keeps his momentum moving forwards through contact
• Patience at the line of scrimmage but makes strong cuts when the opening appears
• Complete skills as a pass catcher
• Squares up blitzers as a pass blocker
• Only 3 fumbles at Alabama

Weaknesses:

• More quick than sudden as an athlete
• Not great speed, can't run away from defenders
• Doesn't create explosive plays
• Sometimes late to decipher running lanes/runs into his own blockers
• Inconsistent pass blocker
• Some injury concerns with various leg injuries

Their scouting reports read like pretty much identical players with the differences being that Harris fumbled it 3 times compared to Moss' 6, Harris is a better receiver (though it was a strength of Moss's as well), and Moss was the more explosive runner and better pass protector. I don't really see any reason to think Harris is a transcendent talent unless you're similarly high on Moss who we already have.

What an impressive post. I must admit, you gave a lot of good information, with the Moss comparison. What's your trepidation with Etienne?. He, to me represents more of a big play threat.

[BigBuff423]

I trust Beane...whatever he decides. However, I would agree that investing in a 1st Round RB is rarely a good decision and would be happy to Draft a big man in the trenches or CB. 

 

That said, do any of us really believe that a health Christian McCaffrey wouldn't absolutely EAT in this Offense? Because IMHO, that's Etienne. Etienne is a RB, but he's also the Slot WR, Swiss Army knife of an Offense that can do so much which adds a "homerun threat" to this good unit for the Bills. Also, remember when the analytics guys said Josh Allen was a bust before he ever put on a uniform? I'm not saying Etienne is a RB version of Josh Allen, but I do refer back to my original statement: I trust Beane.

 

I think the article is insightful, well documented as it outlined their argument and adds to logical discourse for us as fans. However, we also must put into context each decision made for those RB teams as it happened in its historical view. Cardinals were referenced yet Warner was on his way out. Giants were two Eli Manning throws away from being 0-2, and the Pats had Tom Brady which trumped everything else. As for the Chiefs this year, well they went to the Super Bowl after winning it, and we all know repeating as Champs is nearly impossible to do in the contemporary NFL. Moreover, Fournette - a former 4th overall pick - was on the Bucs winning Super Bowl team and played a role. Did he lead the team in YPC? No, but he was a factor. The point is, while I can agree with the general intent of the article that run blocking has more to do with running success than a RB as a single unit or that due to the devaluation of RBs in the NFL using a 1st Round pick on a RB doesn't make logistical sense. That is NOT to say there aren't times in the context of the team it couldn't be impactful for the success of the team over the course of the Rookie contract. 

[DCOrange]

4 minutes ago, Eastport bills said:

What an impressive post. I must admit, you gave a lot of good information, with the Moss comparison. What's your trepidation with Etienne?. He, to me represents more of a big play threat.

Etienne is definitely a big play threat. For me personally, I'm just against the idea of drafting RBs early in general and especially in this case where we've done it the last two years (and IMO have at least one starting caliber RB in Moss). I also think with an offense that spreads the defense out and tries to get them to put smaller defenders on the field, you want a powerful runner like Moss or Harris to make them pay rather than trying to put more speed on the field in Etienne.

 

Having said that, I'll think it's the wrong choice if we go with Etienne but I at least understand he's a different kind of RB from the ones we have (outside of maybe Breida but we don't really know how big a part of the offense we plan to make him anyways) and therefore would give us a different look. So from that sense, it's justifiable even if I just think it's the wrong way to build a team. I don't think Harris is really a justifiable pick.

[Mr. WEO]

2 hours ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

That would be my guess.   He just had that look in his eyes - I can't describe it exactly but I know it when I see it.  IKYKWIM.

 

I think there's a reason his teammates voted him the "Ed Block Courage" award, over a guy who played 3 playoff games on a freakin' broken leg fergoshsakes.

 

I wonder how much of that still goes on....narcotics before kickoff.

[Eastport bills]

6 minutes ago, DCOrange said:

Etienne is definitely a big play threat. For me personally, I'm just against the idea of drafting RBs early in general and especially in this case where we've done it the last two years (and IMO have at least one starting caliber RB in Moss). I also think with an offense that spreads the defense out and tries to get them to put smaller defenders on the field, you want a powerful runner like Moss or Harris to make them pay rather than trying to put more speed on the field in Etienne.

 

Having said that, I'll think it's the wrong choice if we go with Etienne but I at least understand he's a different kind of RB from the ones we have (outside of maybe Breida but we don't really know how big a part of the offense we plan to make him anyways) and therefore would give us a different look. So from that sense, it's justifiable even if I just think it's the wrong way to build a team. I don't think Harris is really a justifiable pick.

I agree, if we had to redesign the offense ,getting away from our strengths,(Josh and quality receivers in 5 wide,empty formation s)in order to maximize an elusive back, who knows if it improves us. Maybe just getting more out of Moss and Breida with Hollister as H back in passing looks.

[ColoradoBills]

The thing about the Bills RBs last year was that only Moss and Singletary were dressing for games.

IF Moss, Breida and Singletary could dress this year I think it brings some better diversity.

 

The main reason for dressing only 2 is the Taiwan Jones ST's issue.  I would love to see a replacement for him this year.

I refuse to believe that a 33 year old gunner can't be replaced.  He had 6 tackles and a dropped touchdown in stats last year.

Heck Breida played some special teams and had 2 tackles last year.

 

I hope Beane can find a ST Gunner at another depth position and free the Bills running backs to dress 3 on game day.

If that doesn't happen there is a good chance that Devin doesn't dress every game and that is a shame.

[Bleeding Bills Blue]

Just now, ColoradoBills said:

The thing about the Bills RBs last year was that only Moss and Singletary were dressing for games.

IF Moss, Breida and Singletary could dress this year I think it brings some better diversity.

 

The main reason for dressing only 2 is the Taiwan Jones ST's issue.  I would love to see a replacement for him this year.

I refuse to believe that a 33 year old gunner can't be replaced.  He had 6 tackles and a dropped touchdown in stats last year.

Heck Breida played some special teams and had 2 tackles last year.

 

I hope Beane can find a ST Gunner at another depth position and free the Bills running backs to dress 3 on game day.

If that doesn't happen there is a good chance that Devin doesn't dress every game and that is a shame.

 

Neal is a gunner.  Kummerow was another.  Dane Jackson or Wallace can probably do it.  

Depends how depth charts shake out at other positions

WR: Diggs, Bease, Sanders, Davis, and several guys fighting for 2 spots.  Those guys likely need to play special teams to dress on gamedays. 

CB: White, Jackson, Wallace, Johnson, Neal - I think they draft someone here too so the competition ramps up, and again ST can be a differentiator.

S: With marlowe gone, the big nickel spot is a bit more open, and they could use to add some depth here that would also participate.

 

NE would usually carry 4 on the active roster, and dress 3.  But their teams ace from the group was burkhead, who also contributed on offense.