Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: What did I tell ya?

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by wxwax View Post
    Best sure did look good when he was healthy.
    Which he was for a whole whopping 7 games in 2 seasons. cut the cord. he's done.
    Screw you guys, I'm going home.

  2. #12
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    5,770
    Blog Entries
    11
    @ vance,

    It's not that 1st round RB are a better lot than 7th round RBs.

    Its HOW much better are they than the difference 1st and 7th round DEs, or OLs or QBs.

    You want to use the 1st round picks for positions that both fall off fast in game breaking quality with draft round and the positions contribution to team success.

    Mike is arguing both the falloff (called "Q" in electronics) is low for RBs when compared with other positions, and that individual RB contribution is lower than other positions.


    I note for the record, that your list of 1st round RBs, 14 in all, contain 2 teams in the playoffs, 1 of which the RB was on IR for 1/2 the year. Therefore 1 starter for a playoff team.

    The 7th round picks contain 26 RBs, I checked 5 of the names (because I don't know many of the names) and found 5 playoff teams.

    Did you make Mike's case? Great RBs don't make great teams. Great teams shop for RBs in the bargain rounds.
    Last edited by darvon; 01-29-2012 at 09:38 AM.

  3. #13
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Baltimore, MD
    Posts
    3,917
    Blog Entries
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by darvon View Post
    I note for the record, that your list of 1st round RBs, 14 in all, contain 2 teams in the playoffs, 1 of which the RB was on IR for 1/2 the year. Therefore 1 starter for a playoff team.

    The 7th round picks contain 26 RBs, I checked 5 of the names (because I don't know many of the names) and found 5 playoff teams.

    Did you make Mike's case? Great RBs don't make great teams. Great teams shop for RBs in the bargain rounds.
    Correlation not causation.
    "Biggest blowout since Andy Reid vs. Skinny jeans" - Colts01

  4. #14
       
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    2,868
    Blog Entries
    32
    Yeah, the only RB of those 7th round guys who contributes anything to a playoff team is Bradshaw. The rest just happen to be there. No point there.

    In some cases, the Saints for instance, drafting a 1st rd back is daft. Ingram goes to a team where they throw it a lot, AND use a multi-back system. But if a team (again, the Bengals make a good example) needs a RB to carry the ball 20+ times a game, they're much more likely to find a starter and a good RB early rather than late. It's quite obvious. How many pro bowls, or 1000 yd seasons do those 1st guys have? How many of those 7th rd guys are even on teams?
    Twitter @vancemeek "I wish I could say something classy and inspirational, but that just wouldn't be our style. Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory...lasts forever."-Shane Falco

  5. #15
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    5,770
    Blog Entries
    11
    Correlation not causation.
    But anti-correlation disproves causation.

    @Vince,

    But you are making a skew point. Unless Millen has been cloned, most teams will choose better players at ANY position from the 1st round than the 7th. The question on the table is that if you need a RB and a DE, and you have a 1st and a 7th, which way is most probable to use those picks effectively.

    Mike and I are saying that both RBs are more "flat" than other positions, like DE, i.e. the difference between the BEST DE in a draft and the 6th Best DE is greater (in terms of position skill level) than the difference between the Best RB and the 6th best RB.

    Also we argue that a mundane RB and a Great DE provides for better TEAM success than the other way around.

    Thus the position of RB is devalued relative to many other positions on the team. This is a newer trend.
    We also state that the Q of the RB position is lower than that for some other positions. This is a longer term trend.

    Which is why mid-level and upper mid level RB salaries are lower than OL and DE and , of course, QB.

  6. #16
       
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    2,868
    Blog Entries
    32
    I didn't say a RB should be valued over DE, I said if you need a good RB, it's better to get it early than late. Quite simple.
    Twitter @vancemeek "I wish I could say something classy and inspirational, but that just wouldn't be our style. Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory...lasts forever."-Shane Falco

  7. #17
       
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Detroit
    Posts
    5,770
    Blog Entries
    11
    This is your post that took us in this direction.

    I still don't completely buy into this "don't draft a RB in the first round" idea. If you look at recent draft history, you'll see that nearly all of the 1st round picks are starting, contributing RBs in the NFL, while late round backs are working out at no better than 1 in 10. If you need a RB and a great prospect is available, take him when you get him.
    Go Big said, Mike said, and I support, the idea that a RB is to much of a devalued position to use a 1st round pick upon. Usually a team has major needs in 3-4 positions and minor needs in 3-4 more. We are saying that a 1st round pick is almost always more useful picking another position, either one of higher impact than a single RB or one of higher Q, where the difference between 1st and middle rounds will (probably) buy you more.


    The top paid RB in each team (on avg) is about the 9th highest player on that team. Obviously market prices are driven by perception of value.

  8. #18
    Jahvid Best-injured but started in a passing offense
    Bust should not be the starter if he comes back next year. Leshoure was well on his way to taking over starting duties before he tore his achilles. Jahvid is too fragile to be a starting RB in the NFL.
    Screw you guys, I'm going home.

  9. #19
       
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    2,868
    Blog Entries
    32
    If a team passes on the better player just because he's a RB they are morons. The Bengals need a RB and I hope they take one in the first 3 rounds.
    Twitter @vancemeek "I wish I could say something classy and inspirational, but that just wouldn't be our style. Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory...lasts forever."-Shane Falco

  10. #20
       
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Posts
    4,139
    Quote Originally Posted by vancemeek View Post
    If a team passes on the better player just because he's a RB they are morons. The Bengals need a RB and I hope they take one in the first 3 rounds.
    Why in the 1st 3 rounds and not take one for sure in the 1st? Your premise is most 1st round backs turn out to be starters or solid contributors. Are you starting to doubt the value of taking a back that high and getting better value in the 2nd or 3rd round?
    "If I could start my life all over again, I would be a professional football player, and you damn well better believe I would be a Pittsburgh Steeler." Jack Lambert, 1990 HoF Introduction.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •