How early is "too early" for Gurley in the NFL draft? (1 Viewer)

[Andrew74]

Yeah I don't recall anyone calling Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell a can't miss prospect. Nice try though.

I thought Leaf was neck and neck with Manning. How does a guy who is not a "can't miss prospect" get voted the biggest bust of all time?

Neck and Neck <> Can't Miss - Take last season, nobody called Bortles a "can't miss" prospect despite him being the best QB prospect.

So Manning wasn't a can't miss prospect?

 

[Freelove]

Yeah I don't recall anyone calling Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell a can't miss prospect. Nice try though.

I thought Leaf was neck and neck with Manning. How does a guy who is not a "can't miss prospect" get voted the biggest bust of all time?

Neck and Neck <> Can't Miss - Take last season, nobody called Bortles a "can't miss" prospect despite him being the best QB prospect.

So Manning wasn't a can't miss prospect?

Leaf was considered higher ceiling, but with maturity issues that made him riskier. Manning was considered more pro-ready and mature, but without the same upside.

Any time the pundits use the word "risk," they're taking into account the possibility of a miss.

 

[FUBAR]

Yeah I don't recall anyone calling Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell a can't miss prospect. Nice try though.

I thought Leaf was neck and neck with Manning. How does a guy who is not a "can't miss prospect" get voted the biggest bust of all time?

Neck and Neck <> Can't Miss - Take last season, nobody called Bortles a "can't miss" prospect despite him being the best QB prospect.

So Manning wasn't a can't miss prospect?

Leaf was considered higher ceiling, but with maturity issues that made him riskier. Manning was considered more pro-ready and mature, but without the same upside.Any time the pundits use the word "risk," they're taking into account the possibility of a miss.

It's funny in hindsight to think Peyton lacked upside. But yeah, that was the debate.

 

[Sabertooth]

I think the bust rate on first round Qbs is probably much better than first round rbs.

 

[georg013]

I think the bust rate on first round Qbs is probably much better than first round rbs.

There are many QBs in the league who have no business starting for their team (Jay Cutler comes to mind). This "RBs shouldn't be drafted in the first round" is crap IMO. If a RB is a first round talent, he should be taken in the first round. In 2013, the following WRs were taken in the first round: Tavon Austin, Cordarelle Patterson, and DeAndre Hopkins. Hopkins was the only one to pan out yet we still have fantasy owners who believe in Patterson and Tavon Austin. In my eyes, they are busts but they seemingly get a pass. In 2012, Floyd, Blackmon, Wright, and AJ Jenkins were drafted. How did those guys pan out? NONE of them are elite. In fact, I would venture to say none of them were worth the first round price paid for them based on production. But no one seems to have a problem with WRs being drafted with a first round pick. RGIII was taken with the 2nd overall pick and has NOT lived up to expectations yet the only person we seem to highlight from that class is Trent Richardson. My point is, NO position is immune from first round bustage (coined word). The idea that RBs should not be taken in the first round is ridiculous. We are still waiting for Sam Bradford to live up to his hype and don't even get me started on Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, and Blaine Gabbert. Tim Tebow ring a bell? Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, Darrius Heyward Bey? ALL picks are a gamble. Not just the RB position. If you like a guy, you take him. Even if that means taking a RB in the first round if you have him rated as such.

 

[Sabertooth]

Did you even look at my post in regards to the last 7 entire drafts? There have been zero stars, none! Ok Chris Johnson had one great season. That's not risk, that's fiscal suicide.

 

[Sabertooth]

I think the bust rate on first round Qbs is probably much better than first round rbs.

There are many QBs in the league who have no business starting for their team (Jay Cutler comes to mind). This "RBs shouldn't be drafted in the first round" is crap IMO. If a RB is a first round talent, he should be taken in the first round. In 2013, the following WRs were taken in the first round: Tavon Austin, Cordarelle Patterson, and DeAndre Hopkins. Hopkins was the only one to pan out yet we still have fantasy owners who believe in Patterson and Tavon Austin. In my eyes, they are busts but they seemingly get a pass. In 2012, Floyd, Blackmon, Wright, and AJ Jenkins were drafted. How did those guys pan out? NONE of them are elite. In fact, I would venture to say none of them were worth the first round price paid for them based on production. But no one seems to have a problem with WRs being drafted with a first round pick. RGIII was taken with the 2nd overall pick and has NOT lived up to expectations yet the only person we seem to highlight from that class is Trent Richardson. My point is, NO position is immune from first round bustage (coined word). The idea that RBs should not be taken in the first round is ridiculous. We are still waiting for Sam Bradford to live up to his hype and don't even get me started on Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, and Blaine Gabbert. Tim Tebow ring a bell? Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, Darrius Heyward Bey? ALL picks are a gamble. Not just the RB position. If you like a guy, you take him. Even if that means taking a RB in the first round if you have him rated as such.

Mike Sherman though like this. He thought he'd go after his guys. He did it too. And wasted many of Favre's prime seasons in the process. It's foolish to think this way. Did you not read my list which showed that every single back taken in the first round has gotten their coach fired except three? And even those three were busts? Good grief I hate draft dogma.

 

[Cjw_55106]

Id be pretty disappointed if Mn took him in the first round.

 

[georg013]

I think the bust rate on first round Qbs is probably much better than first round rbs.

There are many QBs in the league who have no business starting for their team (Jay Cutler comes to mind). This "RBs shouldn't be drafted in the first round" is crap IMO. If a RB is a first round talent, he should be taken in the first round. In 2013, the following WRs were taken in the first round: Tavon Austin, Cordarelle Patterson, and DeAndre Hopkins. Hopkins was the only one to pan out yet we still have fantasy owners who believe in Patterson and Tavon Austin. In my eyes, they are busts but they seemingly get a pass. In 2012, Floyd, Blackmon, Wright, and AJ Jenkins were drafted. How did those guys pan out? NONE of them are elite. In fact, I would venture to say none of them were worth the first round price paid for them based on production. But no one seems to have a problem with WRs being drafted with a first round pick. RGIII was taken with the 2nd overall pick and has NOT lived up to expectations yet the only person we seem to highlight from that class is Trent Richardson. My point is, NO position is immune from first round bustage (coined word). The idea that RBs should not be taken in the first round is ridiculous. We are still waiting for Sam Bradford to live up to his hype and don't even get me started on Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, and Blaine Gabbert. Tim Tebow ring a bell? Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, Darrius Heyward Bey? ALL picks are a gamble. Not just the RB position. If you like a guy, you take him. Even if that means taking a RB in the first round if you have him rated as such.

Mike Sherman though like this. He thought he'd go after his guys. He did it too. And wasted many of Favre's prime seasons in the process. It's foolish to think this way. Did you not read my list which showed that every single back taken in the first round has gotten their coach fired except three? And even those three were busts? Good grief I hate draft dogma.

So, teams failed to win games BECASUE of the RB they took in the first round. Yeah, that makes sense. Because they drafted a RB in the first round, they were fired. Got it. Not because the team and coach sucked.

 

[FUBAR]

I think the bust rate on first round Qbs is probably much better than first round rbs.

There are many QBs in the league who have no business starting for their team (Jay Cutler comes to mind). This "RBs shouldn't be drafted in the first round" is crap IMO. If a RB is a first round talent, he should be taken in the first round. In 2013, the following WRs were taken in the first round: Tavon Austin, Cordarelle Patterson, and DeAndre Hopkins. Hopkins was the only one to pan out yet we still have fantasy owners who believe in Patterson and Tavon Austin. In my eyes, they are busts but they seemingly get a pass. In 2012, Floyd, Blackmon, Wright, and AJ Jenkins were drafted. How did those guys pan out? NONE of them are elite. In fact, I would venture to say none of them were worth the first round price paid for them based on production. But no one seems to have a problem with WRs being drafted with a first round pick. RGIII was taken with the 2nd overall pick and has NOT lived up to expectations yet the only person we seem to highlight from that class is Trent Richardson. My point is, NO position is immune from first round bustage (coined word). The idea that RBs should not be taken in the first round is ridiculous. We are still waiting for Sam Bradford to live up to his hype and don't even get me started on Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, and Blaine Gabbert. Tim Tebow ring a bell? Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, Darrius Heyward Bey? ALL picks are a gamble. Not just the RB position. If you like a guy, you take him. Even if that means taking a RB in the first round if you have him rated as such.

Mike Sherman though like this. He thought he'd go after his guys. He did it too. And wasted many of Favre's prime seasons in the process. It's foolish to think this way. Did you not read my list which showed that every single back taken in the first round has gotten their coach fired except three? And even those three were busts? Good grief I hate draft dogma.

So, teams failed to win games BECASUE of the RB they took in the first round. Yeah, that makes sense. Because they drafted a RB in the first round, they were fired. Got it. Not because the team and coach sucked.

teams who suck make bad decisions. Including taking a ruining back high.

While an extreme example. Let's say the best punter prospect since ray guy is in this draft. his talent must be first round, right?

 

[Sabertooth]

I think the bust rate on first round Qbs is probably much better than first round rbs.

There are many QBs in the league who have no business starting for their team (Jay Cutler comes to mind). This "RBs shouldn't be drafted in the first round" is crap IMO. If a RB is a first round talent, he should be taken in the first round. In 2013, the following WRs were taken in the first round: Tavon Austin, Cordarelle Patterson, and DeAndre Hopkins. Hopkins was the only one to pan out yet we still have fantasy owners who believe in Patterson and Tavon Austin. In my eyes, they are busts but they seemingly get a pass. In 2012, Floyd, Blackmon, Wright, and AJ Jenkins were drafted. How did those guys pan out? NONE of them are elite. In fact, I would venture to say none of them were worth the first round price paid for them based on production. But no one seems to have a problem with WRs being drafted with a first round pick. RGIII was taken with the 2nd overall pick and has NOT lived up to expectations yet the only person we seem to highlight from that class is Trent Richardson. My point is, NO position is immune from first round bustage (coined word). The idea that RBs should not be taken in the first round is ridiculous. We are still waiting for Sam Bradford to live up to his hype and don't even get me started on Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, and Blaine Gabbert. Tim Tebow ring a bell? Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, Darrius Heyward Bey? ALL picks are a gamble. Not just the RB position. If you like a guy, you take him. Even if that means taking a RB in the first round if you have him rated as such.

Mike Sherman though like this. He thought he'd go after his guys. He did it too. And wasted many of Favre's prime seasons in the process. It's foolish to think this way. Did you not read my list which showed that every single back taken in the first round has gotten their coach fired except three? And even those three were busts? Good grief I hate draft dogma.

So, teams failed to win games BECASUE of the RB they took in the first round. Yeah, that makes sense. Because they drafted a RB in the first round, they were fired. Got it. Not because the team and coach sucked.

Kind of a chicken and egg thing going on here.

 

[Sabertooth]

I think the bust rate on first round Qbs is probably much better than first round rbs.

There are many QBs in the league who have no business starting for their team (Jay Cutler comes to mind). This "RBs shouldn't be drafted in the first round" is crap IMO. If a RB is a first round talent, he should be taken in the first round. In 2013, the following WRs were taken in the first round: Tavon Austin, Cordarelle Patterson, and DeAndre Hopkins. Hopkins was the only one to pan out yet we still have fantasy owners who believe in Patterson and Tavon Austin. In my eyes, they are busts but they seemingly get a pass. In 2012, Floyd, Blackmon, Wright, and AJ Jenkins were drafted. How did those guys pan out? NONE of them are elite. In fact, I would venture to say none of them were worth the first round price paid for them based on production. But no one seems to have a problem with WRs being drafted with a first round pick. RGIII was taken with the 2nd overall pick and has NOT lived up to expectations yet the only person we seem to highlight from that class is Trent Richardson. My point is, NO position is immune from first round bustage (coined word). The idea that RBs should not be taken in the first round is ridiculous. We are still waiting for Sam Bradford to live up to his hype and don't even get me started on Jake Locker, Christian Ponder, and Blaine Gabbert. Tim Tebow ring a bell? Mark Sanchez, Josh Freeman, Darrius Heyward Bey? ALL picks are a gamble. Not just the RB position. If you like a guy, you take him. Even if that means taking a RB in the first round if you have him rated as such.

Mike Sherman though like this. He thought he'd go after his guys. He did it too. And wasted many of Favre's prime seasons in the process. It's foolish to think this way. Did you not read my list which showed that every single back taken in the first round has gotten their coach fired except three? And even those three were busts? Good grief I hate draft dogma.

So, teams failed to win games BECASUE of the RB they took in the first round. Yeah, that makes sense. Because they drafted a RB in the first round, they were fired. Got it. Not because the team and coach sucked.

teams who suck make bad decisions. Including taking a ruining back high.

While an extreme example. Let's say the best punter prospect since ray guy is in this draft. his talent must be first round, right?

I almost brought up Ray Guy last night.

 

[georg013]

Maybe this is will help you understand things better.

Your statement of "Teams who suck take running backs high" should read "Teams who suck take bad players high." Blame it on the scouting department, not the position. I personally don't buy into the devalued running back hoopla. If a guy is talented enough to warrant a first round grade and he HAPPENS TO BE A RB, I say take him and take him early.

 

[jurb26]

Maybe this is will help you understand things better.

Your statement of "Teams who suck take running backs high" should read "Teams who suck take bad players high." Blame it on the scouting department, not the position. If a guy is talented enough to warrant a first round grade and he HAPPENS TO BE A RB, I say take him and take him early.

Yes I deleted the devaluation part of your post because I can't in good faith leave it in there and credit good posting... It's real IMO.

Nonetheless, this is all that matters. Bad teams draft bad players.

 

[georg013]

Maybe this is will help you understand things better.

Your statement of "Teams who suck take running backs high" should read "Teams who suck take bad players high." Blame it on the scouting department, not the position. If a guy is talented enough to warrant a first round grade and he HAPPENS TO BE A RB, I say take him and take him early.

Yes I deleted the devaluation part of your post because I can't in good faith leave it in there and credit good posting... It's real IMO.

Nonetheless, this is all that matters. Bad teams draft bad players.

I will say this about the RB position being devalued. Short term, the effects are there. Guys aren't getting paid what they used to and teams are getting by with marginal talent. HOWEVER, I believe this thing will come full circle and teams will get back to running the ball. I'm thinking long term when I say "hoopla", meaning, I don't believe the shift is permanent. But that's just my opinion. Once some HIGH QUALITY, BEAST backs come into the league, teams will gladly hitch their wagons. Then you will see QBs get devalued and teams only passing 10 times a game a-la Trent Dilfer. Kidding.

 

[Anarchy99]

Not that I am really adding anything to the discussion, but since 2000, here were the RBs taken in the first 10 picks:

Jamal Lewis - 2000 - 5

Thomas Jones - 2000 - 7

LaDainian Tomlinson - 2001 - 5

Ronnie Brown - 2005 - 2

Cedric Benson - 2005 - 4

Cadillac Williams - 2005 - 5

Reggie Bush - 2006 - 2

Adrian Peterson - 2007 - 7

Darren McFadden - 2008 - 4

CJ Spiller - 2010 - 9

Trent Ricardson - 2012 - 3

I would say 2 HOFers, a couple of solid careers in Lewis and Jones, and limited success for the other guys.

By comparison, here are the QBs drafted in the Top 10 in that same timeframe:

Michael Vick - 2001 - 1

David Carr - 2002 - 1

Joey Harrington - 2002 - 3

Carson Palmer - 2003 - 1

Byron Leftwich - 2003 - 7

Eli Manning - 2004 - 1

Philip Rivers - 2004 - 4

Alex Smith - 2005 - 1

Vince Young - 2006 - 3

JaMarcus Russell - 2007 - 1

Matt Ryan - 2008 - 3

Matt Stafford - 2009 - 1

Mark Sanchez - 2009 - 5

Sam Bradford - 2010 - 1

Cam Newton - 2011 - 1

Jake Locker - 2011 - 8

Blaine Gabbert - 2011 - 10

Andrew Luck - 2012 - 1

Robert Griffin III - 2012 - 2

Ryan Tannehill - 2012 - 8

Blake Bortles - 2014 - 3

Some really good, long term starters in that group . . . and some complete disasters.

 

[FUBAR]

Not that I am really adding anything to the discussion, but since 2000, here were the RBs taken in the first 10 picks:

Jamal Lewis - 2000 - 5

Thomas Jones - 2000 - 7

LaDainian Tomlinson - 2001 - 5

Ronnie Brown - 2005 - 2

Cedric Benson - 2005 - 4

Cadillac Williams - 2005 - 5

Adrian Peterson - 2007 - 7

Darren McFadden - 2008 - 4

CJ Spiller - 2010 - 9

Trent Ricardson - 2012 - 3

I would say 2 HOFers, a couple of solid careers in Lewis and Jones, and limited success for the other guys.

By comparison, here are the QBs drafted in the Top 10 in that same timeframe:

Michael Vick - 2001 - 1

David Carr - 2002 - 1

Joey Harrington - 2002 - 3

Carson Palmer - 2003 - 1

Byron Leftwich - 2003 - 7

Eli Manning - 2004 - 1

Philip Rivers - 2004 - 4

Alex Smith - 2005 - 1

Vince Young - 2006 - 3

JaMarcus Russell - 2007 - 1

Matt Ryan - 2008 - 3

Matt Stafford - 2009 - 1

Mark Sanchez - 2009 - 5

Sam Bradford - 2010 - 1

Cam Newton - 2011 - 1

Jake Locker - 2011 - 8

Blaine Gabbert - 2011 - 10

Andrew Luck - 2012 - 1

Robert Griffin III - 2012 - 2

Ryan Tannehill - 2012 - 8

Blake Bortles - 2014 - 3

Some really good, long term starters in that group . . . and some complete disasters.

Right, more teams take QBs high, often times reaching, because the position is that important.

 

[FUBAR]

Maybe this is will help you understand things better.

Your statement of "Teams who suck take running backs high" should read "Teams who suck take bad players high." Blame it on the scouting department, not the position. If a guy is talented enough to warrant a first round grade and he HAPPENS TO BE A RB, I say take him and take him early.

Yes I deleted the devaluation part of your post because I can't in good faith leave it in there and credit good posting... It's real IMO.

Nonetheless, this is all that matters. Bad teams draft bad players.

I will say this about the RB position being devalued. Short term, the effects are there. Guys aren't getting paid what they used to and teams are getting by with marginal talent. HOWEVER, I believe this thing will come full circle and teams will get back to running the ball. I'm thinking long term when I say "hoopla", meaning, I don't believe the shift is permanent. But that's just my opinion. Once some HIGH QUALITY, BEAST backs come into the league, teams will gladly hitch their wagons. Then you will see QBs get devalued and teams only passing 10 times a game a-la Trent Dilfer. Kidding.

We'll see of course but there's a reason the franchise / transition tags for running back is only higher than TE, safety, and K/P. maybe it's just the current quality, but it seems (to me anyway) to be by design.

Dallas didn't even bring back the top rusher from last year. seems an indication that they don't feel the position is worth paying big money.

 

[FUBAR]

Maybe this is will help you understand things better.

Your statement of "Teams who suck take running backs high" should read "Teams who suck take bad players high." Blame it on the scouting department, not the position. I personally don't buy into the devalued running back hoopla. If a guy is talented enough to warrant a first round grade and he HAPPENS TO BE A RB, I say take him and take him early.

The only thing we're really debating here is how talented a back has to be to really be a first round talent. IMO it's similar to a safety.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

first round is ok if he's adrian peterson --- otherwise wasted pick

 

[Proust Loves Cake]

Yeah I don't recall anyone calling Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell a can't miss prospect. Nice try though.

I thought Leaf was neck and neck with Manning. How does a guy who is not a "can't miss prospect" get voted the biggest bust of all time?

Revisionist history. People create all sorts of narratives to act like they knew better, and they would never make the same evaluative blunder they made the last go around. Always happens.

find me a single article that calls Russell or Leaf a can't miss prospect. Post the link.

A little difficult with Leaf because that was nearly 20 years ago and the innernets weren't working. But, below, while not saying "can't miss" per se, clearly drives home the point that Leaf was very, very highly regarded coming out of college...

http://thebiglead.com/2012/03/30/remember-14-years-ago-when-a-majority-of-gms-said-they-would-take-ryan-leaf-over-peyton-manning/

And, this, from Todd McShay was not uncommon in the Jamarcus Russell pre-draft hype:

[SIZE=11pt]I can't remember being in such awe of a quarterback in my decade of attending combines and pro days. Russell's passing session was the most impressive of all the pro days I've been to. His footwork for such a big quarterback was surprising. He was nimble in his dropbacks, rolling out and throwing on the run. The ball just explodes out of his hands." -- ESPN's Todd McShay[/SIZE]

 

[Sabertooth]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

 

[georg013]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

 

[ghostguy123]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

I thought his value was inflated by how great he looked, and how drastically he improved from year 1 to year 2.

 

[Tool]

Yeah I don't recall anyone calling Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell a can't miss prospect. Nice try though.

I thought Leaf was neck and neck with Manning. How does a guy who is not a "can't miss prospect" get voted the biggest bust of all time?

Revisionist history. People create all sorts of narratives to act like they knew better, and they would never make the same evaluative blunder they made the last go around. Always happens.

find me a single article that calls Russell or Leaf a can't miss prospect. Post the link.

http://thebiglead.com/2012/03/30/remember-14-years-ago-when-a-majority-of-gms-said-they-would-take-ryan-leaf-over-peyton-manning/

 

[elguapo07]

I think he's a quicker more elusive Corey Dillon with better hands.

 

[georg013]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

I thought his value was inflated by how great he looked, and how drastically he improved from year 1 to year 2.

I dont see great when I watch him run. Thats where we differ.

 

[kutta]

Yeah I don't recall anyone calling Ryan Leaf or Jamarcus Russell a can't miss prospect. Nice try though.

I thought Leaf was neck and neck with Manning. How does a guy who is not a "can't miss prospect" get voted the biggest bust of all time?

Revisionist history. People create all sorts of narratives to act like they knew better, and they would never make the same evaluative blunder they made the last go around. Always happens.

find me a single article that calls Russell or Leaf a can't miss prospect. Post the link.

http://thebiglead.com/2012/03/30/remember-14-years-ago-when-a-majority-of-gms-said-they-would-take-ryan-leaf-over-peyton-manning/

Or just google "Ryan Leaf" and "can't miss" and lots of articles pop up. It's hard to post on my phone so I'll leave that to the user.

 

[Sabertooth]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

I thought his value was inflated by how great he looked, and how drastically he improved from year 1 to year 2.

I dont see great when I watch him run. Thats where we differ.

ok. I'm done.

 

[JohnnyU]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

I thought his value was inflated by how great he looked, and how drastically he improved from year 1 to year 2.

I dont see great when I watch him run. Thats where we differ.

ok. I'm done.

Wasn't Bell considered a plodder coming out of college? I don't necessarily think he is now, but there is a fine line with him IMO. I think it would be very easy for this guy to go the plodder direction if he doesn't watch his weight and work out habits.

 

[georg013]

I guess if you dont believe Bell is the greatest thing since sliced bread you are crazy around here. Should I just go ahead and conform now? Bell is the greatest running back in the league! Can I have my groupthink membership card now Saber?

 

[12punch]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

I thought his value was inflated by how great he looked, and how drastically he improved from year 1 to year 2.

I dont see great when I watch him run. Thats where we differ.

What do you see when you watch Trent Richardson run?

 

[Dr. Octopus]

Dallas didn't even bring back the top rusher from last year. seems an indication that they don't feel the position is worth paying big money.

I think a major part of the issue is that by the time RBs get to free agency they are already considered "old" meaning they will have a short shelf life left. This argument works in favor of taking a RB in round 1 to an extent because you get an extra year on that rookie contract, and after five years you can start over again.

Also, if the Cowboys weren't up against the salary cap, I think they would have tried harder to keep Murray. As it is he still got a pretty decent payday, and according to some reports at least one team offered him even more money than he ultimately signed for.

 

[georg013]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

I thought his value was inflated by how great he looked, and how drastically he improved from year 1 to year 2.

I dont see great when I watch him run. Thats where we differ.

What do you see when you watch Trent Richardson run?

Lol

 

[FUBAR]

Dallas didn't even bring back the top rusher from last year. seems an indication that they don't feel the position is worth paying big money.

I think a major part of the issue is that by the time RBs get to free agency they are already considered "old" meaning they will have a short shelf life left. This argument works in favor of taking a RB in round 1 to an extent because you get an extra year on that rookie contract, and after five years you can start over again.

Also, if the Cowboys weren't up against the salary cap, I think they would have tried harder to keep Murray. As it is he still got a pretty decent payday, and according to some reports at least one team offered him even more money than he ultimately signed for.

that's certainly one perspective. Maybe the most logical if the teams still value the position but want to keep it cheap.

 

[Sabertooth]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

I thought his value was inflated by how great he looked, and how drastically he improved from year 1 to year 2.

I dont see great when I watch him run. Thats where we differ.

ok. I'm done.

Wasn't Bell considered a plodder coming out of college? I don't necessarily think he is now, but there is a fine line with him IMO. I think it would be very easy for this guy to go the plodder direction if he doesn't watch his weight and work out habits.

I agree to an extent. FWIW Bell run a 4.6 at 230 at the combine I think. Not really a speedster but not a plodder either. If he porks up, yeah he's going to be in trouble.

 

[Freelove]

Lacy and Bell aren't beasts?

I'm not a Bell fan. His value is inflated by the lack of elite talent at the position. Everything tastes good when you are starving.

I thought his value was inflated by how great he looked, and how drastically he improved from year 1 to year 2.

I dont see great when I watch him run. Thats where we differ.

What do you see when you watch Trent Richardson run?

You, clinging tenaciously to his nutsack, trying desperately to be funny?

 

[Sabertooth]

I guess if you dont believe Bell is the greatest thing since sliced bread you are crazy around here. Should I just go ahead and conform now? Bell is the greatest running back in the league! Can I have my groupthink membership card now Saber?

Well, I guess I look at his NFL career. You may not think it's anything special, but only three running backs have outscored him in PPR since he arrived (Forte, Charles, and Murray). So even counting his rookie season where he missed his first three games, he's top 5. That's not group think, that's fact. I'm not saying he's Walter Peyton, but he's not chopped liver either.

Deny your lying eyes all you want, but he's put up a ton of fantasy points. I'd be shocked if Gurley, no matter who drafts him and when, puts up 588 fantasy points before he's 23 years old. Not bad for a plodder.

 

[Bonfire]

Gurley looking like the next ADP

is this really popular opinion?

Its recency bias, very year the best thought of RB is the next AD, the best thought of WR is the next Megatron, etc. etc.

 

[cstu]

I guess if you dont believe Bell is the greatest thing since sliced bread you are crazy around here. Should I just go ahead and conform now? Bell is the greatest running back in the league! Can I have my groupthink membership card now Saber?

Well, I guess I look at his NFL career. You may not think it's anything special, but only three running backs have outscored him in PPR since he arrived (Forte, Charles, and Murray). So even counting his rookie season where he missed his first three games, he's top 5. That's not group think, that's fact. I'm not saying he's Walter Peyton, but he's not chopped liver either.

Deny your lying eyes all you want, but he's put up a ton of fantasy points. I'd be shocked if Gurley, no matter who drafts him and when, puts up 588 fantasy points before he's 23 years old. Not bad for a plodder.

As a runner he's good but not great, but what makes him special is his receiving ability. Bell looks a WR playing RB now.

 

[cstu]

Gurley looking like the next ADP

is this really popular opinion?

Its recency bias, very year the best thought of RB is the next AD, the best thought of WR is the next Megatron, etc. etc.

No one is saying he's as good as ADP, just that he's the closest since ADP was drafted. He reminds me of a faster Beanie Wells.

 

[Sabertooth]

Gurley looking like the next ADP

is this really popular opinion?

Its recency bias, very year the best thought of RB is the next AD, the best thought of WR is the next Megatron, etc. etc.

No one is saying he's as good as ADP, just that he's the closest since ADP was drafted. He reminds me of a faster Beanie Wells.

People said the exact same thing about Trent Richardson. They did. They also said the same thing about Luck (being the best since Peyton Manning).

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Gurley looking like the next ADP

is this really popular opinion?

Its recency bias, very year the best thought of RB is the next AD, the best thought of WR is the next Megatron, etc. etc.

People say a RB is the next AD when a guy comes out with the same combination of generational talent, elite speed, elite size, and elite productivity like AD did. Trent Richardson was marked as such, yes, and people were wrong about him. It happens. That doesn't mean that every top RB or WR are considered the next AD or Megatron. People weren't calling Eddie Lacy, Bishop Sankey, etc the next AD.

 

[cstu]

Gurley looking like the next ADP

is this really popular opinion?

Its recency bias, very year the best thought of RB is the next AD, the best thought of WR is the next Megatron, etc. etc.

No one is saying he's as good as ADP, just that he's the closest since ADP was drafted. He reminds me of a faster Beanie Wells.

People said the exact same thing about Trent Richardson. They did. They also said the same thing about Luck (being the best since Peyton Manning).

He didn't fail due to lack of physical talent. Whether it was his natural lack of vision, laziness, or both, he had all the physical talents necessary to be an elite RB.

Most guys who bust in the NFL do so because of either injuries or not being mentally suited for the NFL. Rarely is it because scouts judged them wrong physically.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Gurley looking like the next ADP

is this really popular opinion?

Its recency bias, very year the best thought of RB is the next AD, the best thought of WR is the next Megatron, etc. etc.

I don't see Calvin Johnson invoked as a comp every year - anybody that compared Mike Evans to CJ was wrong, he didn't run a sub-4.5 (4.53), let alone a sub-4.4.

Or a RB each cycle compared to a once or twice a decade prospect (certainly not in '13 or '14, that I recall), so slight exaggeration.

 

[Bob Magaw]

Gurley looking like the next ADP

is this really popular opinion?

Its recency bias, very year the best thought of RB is the next AD, the best thought of WR is the next Megatron, etc. etc.

No one is saying he's as good as ADP, just that he's the closest since ADP was drafted. He reminds me of a faster Beanie Wells.

Gurley was a world class junior hurdler, is the same height as and about 5 lbs. heavier than Peterson. Maybe the latter has a better stiff arm, and he ran something like a 10.2-10-3 100 m. as a prep, which I think was probably faster than Gurley. But it isn't obvious to me there were a lot of things Peterson was able to do on the field that Gurley couldn't, with the obligatory, at a comparable stage of development proviso (haven't run their respective stats, but that is based on my recollection of how they looked at the time, in college).

The measureables of Wells weren't in the same class as Gurley, nor do I think he was remotely close as a prospect. Wells had injuries in college, so that could be a better parallel than based on pure physical ability and freakish athleticism.

 

[georg013]

I guess if you dont believe Bell is the greatest thing since sliced bread you are crazy around here. Should I just go ahead and conform now? Bell is the greatest running back in the league! Can I have my groupthink membership card now Saber?

Well, I guess I look at his NFL career. You may not think it's anything special, but only three running backs have outscored him in PPR since he arrived (Forte, Charles, and Murray). So even counting his rookie season where he missed his first three games, he's top 5. That's not group think, that's fact. I'm not saying he's Walter Peyton, but he's not chopped liver either.

Deny your lying eyes all you want, but he's put up a ton of fantasy points. I'd be shocked if Gurley, no matter who drafts him and when, puts up 588 fantasy points before he's 23 years old. Not bad for a plodder.

I don't see a great running back. I see a back in a great situation who puts up a ton of fantasy points because of his receptions and situation. Big difference. I am more impressed with Jeremy Hill than Leveon Bell and Hill is in a timeshare. Maybe these lying eyes are looking at more than 15 dumpoffs per game while Ben runs around in the backfield? I don't know. High fantasy production equals GREAT RUNNING BACK? Not.

 

[cstu]

Gurley looking like the next ADP

is this really popular opinion?

Its recency bias, very year the best thought of RB is the next AD, the best thought of WR is the next Megatron, etc. etc.

No one is saying he's as good as ADP, just that he's the closest since ADP was drafted. He reminds me of a faster Beanie Wells.

Gurley was a world class junior hurdler, is the same height as and about 5 lbs. heavier than Peterson. Maybe the latter has a better stiff arm, and he ran something like a 10.2-10-3 100 m. as a prep, which I think was probably faster than Gurley. But it isn't obvious to me there were a lot of things Peterson was able to do on the field that Gurley couldn't, with the obligatory, at a comparable stage of development proviso (haven't run their respective stats, but that is based on my recollection of how they looked at the time, in college).

The measureables of Wells weren't in the same class as Gurley, nor do I think he was remotely close as a prospect. Wells had injuries in college, so that could be a better parallel than based on pure physical ability and freakish athleticism.

Wells ran a 4.38 and 4.44 at his Pro Day weighing 237 lbs. - even on Ohio State's fast track that's impressive.

Unfortunately we'll never have Gurley's measurables to compare (except bench which Wells beat him 25 to 17 reps) and will have to rely on tape.

 

[Bob Magaw]

So that would be about a 4.5 or 4.6 adjusting for Ohio State's fast track? Wells never looked as fast as Gurley to me, not even close.

I'll stand by his not being close as a prospect at a comparable stage of development, either. Almost made it to the second round, not coming off a torn ACL.

* Ohio St. Used to claim Joey Galloway ran a sub-4.2. SUURRREE he did.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I don't see a great running back. I see a back in a great situation who puts up a ton of fantasy points because of his receptions and situation. Big difference. I am more impressed with Jeremy Hill than Leveon Bell and Hill is in a timeshare. Maybe these lying eyes are looking at more than 15 dumpoffs per game while Ben runs around in the backfield? I don't know. High fantasy production equals GREAT RUNNING BACK? Not.

People were blown away by Bell as early as the first game of 2014, well before he had compiled any stats, just based on the way he looked running the ball. He has elite vision and his patience, burst, and lateral agility are all top-end after the weight loss, not to mention his receiving ability.

It's not like he was just living off his receiving ability. He was 2nd in the NFL in rushing and right near the top in YPC as well. It's also extremely disingenuous to classify his receiving numbers as a bunch of dump-offs. He runs WR routes (and sometimes even lines up as one) like no workhorse back has since a 23 year old Steven Jackson. His yards per catch last year was 2nd in the NFL for RBs behind only pass specialist Roy Helu. Yes, even ahead of guys like Darren Sproles and Shane Vereen.