Better Rookie Running Back Class - 2014 or 2015? (1 Viewer)

[Freelove]

Gordon will be the next in a long line of Badger rb busts. I'd take Hyde over him in a second. If it wasn't for Gurley the 2015 rb crop would be one of the worst in recent memory.

Can you say more about what leads you to think this?

Can you say more about what leads you to not think this?

Gordon appears to have skills and attributes that tend to make runners valuable to NFL franchises. Scouts and draftniks seem to believe a number of other RB's in this class do as well.

I think it's pretty clear that this is more or less the consensus position. That doesn't mean it'll be right. But it does mean that it makes it interesting to hear why others might disagree with that consensus. If you've got good reasons, I'm sure lots of us would like to hear them.

Scouts and draftniks tout players every year, last year, this year, next year etc. They hyped Johnny Manziel last year too so who cares? The only rb that sticks out to me as having high upside is Gurley, not impressed with Gordon at all. Of course there will be outliers but I see both the '14 and '15 rb crops as being pretty thin. Last year we at least got Hyde, Hill and Mason who look like quality starters, this year who knows? Color me not impressed besides Gurley.

So...no reason then?

Okay.

 

[beef]

Gordon will be the next in a long line of Badger rb busts. I'd take Hyde over him in a second. If it wasn't for Gurley the 2015 rb crop would be one of the worst in recent memory.

Can you say more about what leads you to think this?

Can you say more about what leads you to not think this?

Gordon appears to have skills and attributes that tend to make runners valuable to NFL franchises. Scouts and draftniks seem to believe a number of other RB's in this class do as well.

I think it's pretty clear that this is more or less the consensus position. That doesn't mean it'll be right. But it does mean that it makes it interesting to hear why others might disagree with that consensus. If you've got good reasons, I'm sure lots of us would like to hear them.

Scouts and draftniks tout players every year, last year, this year, next year etc. They hyped Johnny Manziel last year too so who cares? The only rb that sticks out to me as having high upside is Gurley, not impressed with Gordon at all. Of course there will be outliers but I see both the '14 and '15 rb crops as being pretty thin. Last year we at least got Hyde, Hill and Mason who look like quality starters, this year who knows? Color me not impressed besides Gurley.

So...no reason then?

Okay.

at least he took the time to type something out, even if it doesn't answer the question.

 

[spider321]

...but, but, but he played at Wisconsin!!!!

 

[FreeBaGeL]

The Mason are haters are absolutely hilarious.

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/tiny.cgi?id=YaHsg

... take a nap, kids.

please, take your NFL snap-less RBs, who are in imaginary situations over a proven Savage. Please.

Mason to me is no more proven than any of the rookies. He had a nice 89 yard run and other than that he was basically Zac Stacy step for step. He rushed for 4ypc or better in exactly 2 of his 9 starts which is really, really poor. The only other players that have matched that in the last few years are Trent Richardson, Giovanni Bernard, and Bobby Rainey.

There have been a lot of rookie running backs that took over in the back half of their rookie season that looked a lot better than Mason did and still ended up falling completely flat the next year.

 

[Soulfly3]

There have been a lot of rookie running backs that took over in the back half of their rookie season that looked a lot better than Mason did and still ended up falling completely flat the next year.

How many of this year's rookie backs played across from SF, KC, SEA, DEN and ARI defenses in 8 of his 12 games on the season?

900/5 on 195 total touches on the year, with that in mind. "No more proven than any of the rookies"?? C'mon.

ETA: Just for context: the teams I listed above were ranked 2, 3, 7, 13, 28 against the run.(kc kinda sucked, i guess, but he only played them once)

 

[FreeBaGeL]

There have been a lot of rookie running backs that took over in the back half of their rookie season that looked a lot better than Mason did and still ended up falling completely flat the next year.

How many of this year's rookie backs played across from SF, KC, SEA, DEN and ARI defenses in 8 of his 12 games on the season?

900/5 on 195 total touches on the year, with that in mind. "No more proven than any of the rookies"?? C'mon.

His starts came against the #'s 2, 4, 8, 11, 12, 25, 25, 29, 32 rush defenses. A pretty good mix. He had a great game against Oakland and was poor outside of that, rushing for 3.6ypc in his other 8 starts and breaking 4ypc only once.

Unproven? Absolutely. The only thing that he's proven is that he can put up below average game to game efficiency numbers as a starting running back. This is no different than Giovanni Bernard, for whom I was screaming the same thing at the top of my lungs when he was considered a top 5 dynasty running back. Literally, it's all over this forum, go back and look. Like Bernard, people are blinded by fantasy stats compiled alongside poor efficiency numbers. Coaches care about the efficiency, not the fantasy points.

He's young and he can still improve, but he absolutely has to improve. That puts him right alongside the rookies who, likewise, still have to prove it. "Proven" would imply that Mason can stay where he's at and he'll be golden. If Mason continues to give more of the same (rushing for under 4ypc in 80% of his starts) then he'll end up on the pine as quickly as Zac Stacy did.

 

[Soulfly3]

Just for argument's sake... Rookie YPC of some of today's top backs

Lynch: 3.98

Le'Veon Bell: 3.5

Forte: 3.9

McCoy 4.1

... Not sure what more you want from a guy in his first year, in the toughest running division in football. I'm not implying Mason doesn't have to improve. I;m not implying he's got lead dog immunity.

What I am implying is he is far, faaaar better than you're giving him credit for. And a hell of a lot more "proven" than guys who haven't even been picked in the draft yet

 

[Soulfly3]

Another stat just to throw out there for 2014:

Avg # of carries per 20yd rush:

DeMarco Murray: 26

Arian Foster: 29

Le'Veon Bell: 36

Lynch: 40

Mason: 30

.... pretty delish, no?

 

[ROCKET]

Gordon will be the next in a long line of Badger rb busts. I'd take Hyde over him in a second. If it wasn't for Gurley the 2015 rb crop would be one of the worst in recent memory.

Can you say more about what leads you to think this?

Can you say more about what leads you to not think this?

Gordon appears to have skills and attributes that tend to make runners valuable to NFL franchises. Scouts and draftniks seem to believe a number of other RB's in this class do as well.

I think it's pretty clear that this is more or less the consensus position. That doesn't mean it'll be right. But it does mean that it makes it interesting to hear why others might disagree with that consensus. If you've got good reasons, I'm sure lots of us would like to hear them.

Scouts and draftniks tout players every year, last year, this year, next year etc. They hyped Johnny Manziel last year too so who cares? The only rb that sticks out to me as having high upside is Gurley, not impressed with Gordon at all. Of course there will be outliers but I see both the '14 and '15 rb crops as being pretty thin. Last year we at least got Hyde, Hill and Mason who look like quality starters, this year who knows? Color me not impressed besides Gurley.

So...no reason then?

Okay.

My reasoning will be what I saw from these rb's from watching them play last year in college. You can go by what the draftniks are saying, how high they get drafted along with their combine #'s. Works for me.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Just for argument's sake... Rookie YPC of some of today's top backs

Lynch: 3.98

Le'Veon Bell: 3.5

Forte: 3.9

McCoy 4.1

... Not sure what more you want from a guy in his first year, in the toughest running division in football. I'm not implying Mason doesn't have to improve. I;m not implying he's got lead dog immunity.

What I am implying is he is far, faaaar better than you're giving him credit for. And a hell of a lot more "proven" than guys who haven't even been picked in the draft yet

Are you even reading what he's writing? I like Mason as well. He's not claiming that he's "hot garbage", he's making solid points.

 

[Soulfly3]

Are you even reading what he's writing? I like Mason as well. He's not claiming that he's "hot garbage", he's making solid points.

Mason to me is no more proven than any of the rookies.

This is what I'm arguing with.

I'm listening to his points, and I don't agree with them. Which is 110% cool, the point is to hear differing opinions. He has some good ones, and some I just don't buy.

That little quote right there, to me, is ludicrous.

I'm not new to the Tre train. I was riding him well before the draft even happened last year. I watched him thru college and was in love with him. He did nothing to change that in the NFL. In fact, taking out a 2/3rd round fantasy RB that everyone was gushing over, who would NEVER lose out to a rookie, makes me love him even more.

I like Bagel. Knows his stuff. We just clearly disagree on Mason. That's the long and short of it.

 

[Donnybrook]

Hill, Jeremy RB 6'1" 233 LSU Pick 23, Round 2 (55) Bengals 5.5

Cobb, David RB 5'11" 229 Minnesota 5.4

Anyone besides me believe if Cobb gets drafted by the right team he could be equally effective as Hill.

 

[joey]

:converse: