My Thoughts on Lacy vs. Franklin (1 Viewer)

[snichols]

Green Bay always throws a lot at the goal line, even back when they won the Super Bowl, they threw a lot of TD passes to TEs Keith Jackson and Mark Churma.

With no RBs to speak of before the NFL, I see potential for room for two good RBs in Green Bay offensive system. Maybe both can put up good numbers.

These seem like very conflicting points.

Hey this team throws a ton from the 3 yard line and their QB puts up huge numbers and their RBs are never great historically.

But NOW that they have 2 new RBs the system will change and perhaps BOTH can be quality FFball RBs......??? seems VERY unlikely to say the least.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

It seems like a stretch to suggest Franklin's value being in the 6-12 range, or close to Lacy’s. I don't think you could justify that if he was the first back taken by GB, after going late in the fourth, even.

In theory they could have had Lacy as their RB 2 and Frankln as their RB 3 on their board. Just so happens Franklin fell, in this case their "opinion" of the players may be darn near identical.

yes. franklin going in the 4th at a position they had already taken suggests that he had a 3rd round grade, if not a 2nd. Most players have grades at least a round higher by the team selecting than the round they were taken in

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Franklin was never going to be a 2nd round pick, because he's a very limited player. Back when the Franklin buzz was in full flow:

That is not the profile of a successful back in the NFL. Poor vision, below average size, average speed, insufficient quickness and no explosion. Given his current projections as a second rounder, I strongly suspect that Franklin's draft prospects are being overstated.

Based on the above [comps], it would appear Franklin will be drafted in the 4th-7th round

I'll add to that now by saying that Franklin's never going to be a long-term secure starter because he's a very limited player.

 

[EBF]

Franklin was never going to be a 2nd round pick, because he's a very limited player. Back when the Franklin buzz was in full flow:

That is not the profile of a successful back in the NFL. Poor vision, below average size, average speed, insufficient quickness and no explosion. Given his current projections as a second rounder, I strongly suspect that Franklin's draft prospects are being overstated.

>Based on the above [comps], it would appear Franklin will be drafted in the 4th-7th round

I'll add to that now by saying that Franklin's never going to be a long-term secure starter because he's a very limited player.

Don't fall prey to "Jonathan Dwyer" syndrome this year. The fact that a guy was touted to go in X round doesn't matter if he ends up tumbling. Reality is more important than projections. In this case the reality is that lots of teams with RB needs passed on this guy in the 2nd and 3rd round. That tells you something about their evaluations. This isn't like a Lamar Miller or Josh Boyce situation where medical issues pushed a day 2 talent into the very early part of day 3. This is a case where the guy is totally healthy and teams still passed. Based on his draft slot, Franklin is closer to a 5th round pick than a 3rd rounder.

The success rate of 4th round RBs is probably about 10-15%. Think hard about that before you invest a high rookie pick in Franklin. I think he's a 3rd round rookie pick and there are countless guys falling lower in drafts who have better career outlooks.

 

[werdnoynek]

I think there's good arguments on both sides here. I liked both guys coming in and I don't like that they ended up on the same team. As a Packer fan I love it, but as a fantasy owner, I just dont.

Green Bay hasn't been a RBBC team since I can remember. Could they now? Sure. But IMO, one of these guys is going to get a chance at being RB1 in a great situation from the get go and if they take it and (pun intended) run with it, they're going to be a top 20 back right away.

If I have to chose someone, I'm taking Lacy. I loved him at Bama when he was behind Richardson. Find the 2012 Rookie threads duing the 2011 NCAA season and I was hyping him up then. I love his potential now and his pro day didn't bother me a bit. I think his excuse was legit... sure it's convenient and he probably shouldn't have participated, but he did and he was still taken in the 2nd round by a championship calibre team. The toe fusion doesn't really bother me either, he had a hell of a year last year after it. IMO if he goes into camp fully healthy and ready, there's no way they don't give him the first crack at this gig. He's much more talented and proven than Franklin is.

I understand the Franklin backer's too. If you're not a believer in Lacy I think he's a great pickup. I like his potential to be successful in this league, but behind a guy like Lacy I don't believe he should be drafted with the expectation that he's going to go in to Green Bay and be given the job over a healthy Lacy. IMO it's going to take an injury to Lacy for him to get a shot at the starting job right away. Lacy is just better all around IMO, including as a receiver.

 

[snichols]

Even if it isn't a RBBC I think the upside for any given GB RB in this situation is like a high end RB2. I just don't see anything more than that with the style offense they run there. I don't want to spend my 1.01 on Lacy if the highest I can expect to get back is RB2 numbers with all the injury concerns lack of manhood and now legit competition. Just not worth it IMO.

 

[Shutout]

I am starting to smell a lot of drafts where these guys are going to be going back to at 1.04-1.06 in one order or another. Should be real fun watching how that shapes some leagues down the road. You know how these things go, two debatable talents pitted against one another usually results in total payoff with one and the other is out of the league within three-four years.

But, overall, if I am in a league and have a 4-6 pick and that is what I am faced with, I'm not complaining because A)I never thought I'd have a shot at either at those picks not too long ago and B)Hey! At least I'm not sitting on 1.01 and trying to make this decision.

 

[gianmarco]

I thought Eddie Lacy was a first rounder. 32 franchises told me that I was wrong – most of them more than once. That matters. He is worth less to me than he was 72 hours ago. But not because the team drafted a RB at the end of the 4th round.

It's not a factor you can ignore IMO. Franklin is a still a talented RB they used a 4th round pick on so they will get him on the field.

They will get him on the field if he's a talented RB, not because they used a 4th round pick. This happens every year where people think that teams using 2nd, 3rd, or 4th round picks on players, especially if they didn't need to on that particular position, mean they really like the guy and plan on using him. It means no such thing at all and there are LOTS of examples of players being drafted "high" and never having an expectation of playing very much.

If Franklin gets on the field, it's because of his talent. His 4th round draft status guarantees him absolutely nothing.

 

[Sabertooth]

I own the 1.10 and 2.1 picks in our rookie draft. I may just snag Franklin because I am a Packers fan.

 

[cstu]

I thought Eddie Lacy was a first rounder. 32 franchises told me that I was wrong – most of them more than once. That matters. He is worth less to me than he was 72 hours ago. But not because the team drafted a RB at the end of the 4th round.

It's not a factor you can ignore IMO. Franklin is a still a talented RB they used a 4th round pick on so they will get him on the field.

They will get him on the field if he's a talented RB, not because they used a 4th round pick. This happens every year where people think that teams using 2nd, 3rd, or 4th round picks on players, especially if they didn't need to on that particular position, mean they really like the guy and plan on using him. It means no such thing at all and there are LOTS of examples of players being drafted "high" and never having an expectation of playing very much.

If Franklin gets on the field, it's because of his talent. His 4th round draft status guarantees him absolutely nothing.

It's his talent that got him drafted. Perhaps the Packers misjudged his talent but obviously they thought he was worth taking despite already having Lacy. Production is highly correlated to draft position and while there are exceptions NFL teams team are very good at judging RB talent.

All along I thought Franklin was 3rd down material so the move didn't surprise. I expect them both to be involved in RBBC.

 

[cstu]

Even if it isn't a RBBC I think the upside for any given GB RB in this situation is like a high end RB2. I just don't see anything more than that with the style offense they run there. I don't want to spend my 1.01 on Lacy if the highest I can expect to get back is RB2 numbers with all the injury concerns lack of manhood and now legit competition. Just not worth it IMO.

Exactly.

 

[Green Hornet]

Ted Thompson doesn't trade UP for players unless he loves their value. I think Franklin and Lacy have an equal chance of RB1 here. The Packers have made it a point to be "bigger, stronger, tougher" to deal with teams like SF and SEA which may give Lacy a slight advantage.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Even if it isn't a RBBC I think the upside for any given GB RB in this situation is like a high end RB2. I just don't see anything more than that with the style offense they run there. I don't want to spend my 1.01 on Lacy if the highest I can expect to get back is RB2 numbers with all the injury concerns lack of manhood and now legit competition. Just not worth it IMO.

Exactly.

Why do people keep saying this? Look at the carries Benson got last year, the five games he was healthy. The Packers clearly want to run the ball.

 

[Sabertooth]

I agree though that the RB1 in Green Bay isn't all that great.

 

[Concept Coop]

I agree though that the RB1 in Green Bay isn't all that great.

I'd say it's a neutral spot, NFL wide, and a positive, based on the teams likely to take a RB.

But I don’t think we know what the GB RB production will be next year, and moving forward, right now. GB finished close to the middle of the pack, in terms of rushing attempts, despite one of the worst cast of options – only 9 behind Minnesota, for example. Do the attempts go up as the talent level does? I’d guess so, but we don't know.

 

[snichols]

Even if it isn't a RBBC I think the upside for any given GB RB in this situation is like a high end RB2. I just don't see anything more than that with the style offense they run there. I don't want to spend my 1.01 on Lacy if the highest I can expect to get back is RB2 numbers with all the injury concerns lack of manhood and now legit competition. Just not worth it IMO.

Exactly.

Why do people keep saying this? Look at the carries Benson got last year, the five games he was healthy. The Packers clearly want to run the ball.

OK Ced Ben 2013 numbers 71 carries for 248 yards (3.5 ypc) 1 TD (.014 TD/Carry) That covered the span of the first 5 games. Just as a comparison over the season: Shonn Green 276 1063 and 8 TD (3.85 ypc and .028 TD/Carry)ALF 335 1610 and 13 TD (4.80 ypc and .038 TD/Carry)BJGE 278 1094 and 6 TD (3.93 ypc and .021 TD/Carry) Do I need to keep going?? Just because the offense is high powered does not translate to RB1 numbers that is for sure....I am not interested in the 20 for 80 yard stat line every week! Not all carries are created equal and we have seen with great consistency that they run the offense through Rodgers even near the goaline. It's not the # of carries you get it is what you can do with them and running between the 20s isn't that awesome. Now with better RBs will that change, maybe, but I don't think by too much and I would not want to bet on it with a premium rookie pick. Too each their own this is just my opinion.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Sorry, I was under the impression that Lacy was going to be better than Benson and have some catches as well. If you think he'll perform exactly like Benson did, then of course you don't see it.

But it's clear from those week 1-5 numbers that GB wanted to run the ball.

 

[snichols]

Sorry, I was under the impression that Lacy was going to be better than Benson and have some catches as well. If you think he'll perform exactly like Benson did, then of course you don't see it.But it's clear from those week 1-5 numbers that GB wanted to run the ball.

Of course they want to run the ball. Every team would like to run the ball. I think Lacy is a decent player but nothing that will be the cause for a drastic scheme change in GB....They run so they can pass, end of story. I would honestly think if they have a more effective run game (read: more yards/carry) this could actually free up A Rod to throw the ball more and run less because the run will get more respect from the D. Thus better RB actually will benefit A Rod and receivers more than the RB himself. idk though interesting to see how it all turns out.

 

[TheLurkerBelow]

Sorry, I was under the impression that Lacy was going to be better than Benson and have some catches as well. If you think he'll perform exactly like Benson did, then of course you don't see it.But it's clear from those week 1-5 numbers that GB wanted to run the ball.

Of course they want to run the ball. Every team would like to run the ball. I think Lacy is a decent player but nothing that will be the cause for a drastic scheme change in GB....They run so they can pass, end of story. I would honestly think if they have a more effective run game (read: more yards/carry) this could actually free up A Rod to throw the ball more and run less because the run will get more respect from the D. Thus better RB actually will benefit A Rod and receivers more than the RB himself. idk though interesting to see how it all turns out.

I agree as well. Green Bay, like many others, is a 'pass first' team. Teams with that offensive philosophy have a lower ceiling for their RB1 in terms of fantasy production. They give the RBs fewer carries, they like to throw more often on the goal line than other teams, and often a RB needs 20+ carries in a game to really start racking up good numbers, pass first teams don't always provide that many carries in a game to their RB. Not just because more carries means more yards, but as you wear down a team you gain bigger chunks of rushing yards, the play that got you three yards in the first quarter is now getting you five or six in the fourth quarter.

I'd have to do some research, maybe someone else already has, but if we label some teams as "pass first", some as "run first", and others as "balanced", I'd bet we see that even where the RB is very talented, the ceiling is lower for them on pass first teams. I like Lacy a lot, but I'd be wary of taking him with one of the first five picks in a rookie draft, I just think there are guys who have bigger upside.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Look at it this way, if this were a footrace and the winner becomes the feature back, a second round draft pick is given a head start over a fourth round pick. That doesn't mean the second rounder automatically wins the job, but they'll be given a lot more consideration for the position than the later round pick will.

wait...what?

 

[Concept Coop]

Sorry, I was under the impression that Lacy was going to be better than Benson and have some catches as well. If you think he'll perform exactly like Benson did, then of course you don't see it.But it's clear from those week 1-5 numbers that GB wanted to run the ball.

Of course they want to run the ball. Every team would like to run the ball. I think Lacy is a decent player but nothing that will be the cause for a drastic scheme change in GB....They run so they can pass, end of story. I would honestly think if they have a more effective run game (read: more yards/carry) this could actually free up A Rod to throw the ball more and run less because the run will get more respect from the D. Thus better RB actually will benefit A Rod and receivers more than the RB himself. idk though interesting to see how it all turns out.

I agree as well. Green Bay, like many others, is a 'pass first' team. Teams with that offensive philosophy have a lower ceiling for their RB1 in terms of fantasy production. They give the RBs fewer carries, they like to throw more often on the goal line than other teams, and often a RB needs 20+ carries in a game to really start racking up good numbers, pass first teams don't always provide that many carries in a game to their RB. Not just because more carries means more yards, but as you wear down a team you gain bigger chunks of rushing yards, the play that got you three yards in the first quarter is now getting you five or six in the fourth quarter.

I'd have to do some research, maybe someone else already has, but if we label some teams as "pass first", some as "run first", and others as "balanced", I'd bet we see that even where the RB is very talented, the ceiling is lower for them on pass first teams. I like Lacy a lot, but I'd be wary of taking him with one of the first five picks in a rookie draft, I just think there are guys who have bigger upside.

This isn't the case at all. NE, NO, Den, Atlanta - all had plenty of RB production. Some of them just didn't split the production as we'd hope.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

IMO using a trend based on what round a player was drafted is flawed. It essentially assumes that every year is equal in terms of need at a given position (and relative to their other positional needs) and value across the league of that position. A slightly better method would be to use where a player was drafted at his position (i.e., 1st RB taken, etc.), but that still suffers from the same general issues.

I agree with those saying that the best approach is to generally ignore draft round at this point in favor of examining talent, opportunity/situation, and health/injury history.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

Look at it this way, if this were a footrace and the winner becomes the feature back, a second round draft pick is given a head start over a fourth round pick. That doesn't mean the second rounder automatically wins the job, but they'll be given a lot more consideration for the position than the later round pick will.

Good teams don't work this way. Draft slot vanishes when you walk into your first camp.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Sorry, I was under the impression that Lacy was going to be better than Benson and have some catches as well. If you think he'll perform exactly like Benson did, then of course you don't see it.But it's clear from those week 1-5 numbers that GB wanted to run the ball.

Of course they want to run the ball. Every team would like to run the ball. I think Lacy is a decent player but nothing that will be the cause for a drastic scheme change in GB....They run so they can pass, end of story. I would honestly think if they have a more effective run game (read: more yards/carry) this could actually free up A Rod to throw the ball more and run less because the run will get more respect from the D. Thus better RB actually will benefit A Rod and receivers more than the RB himself. idk though interesting to see how it all turns out.

I agree as well. Green Bay, like many others, is a 'pass first' team. Teams with that offensive philosophy have a lower ceiling for their RB1 in terms of fantasy production. They give the RBs fewer carries, they like to throw more often on the goal line than other teams, and often a RB needs 20+ carries in a game to really start racking up good numbers, pass first teams don't always provide that many carries in a game to their RB. Not just because more carries means more yards, but as you wear down a team you gain bigger chunks of rushing yards, the play that got you three yards in the first quarter is now getting you five or six in the fourth quarter. I'd have to do some research, maybe someone else already has, but if we label some teams as "pass first", some as "run first", and others as "balanced", I'd bet we see that even where the RB is very talented, the ceiling is lower for them on pass first teams. I like Lacy a lot, but I'd be wary of taking him with one of the first five picks in a rookie draft, I just think there are guys who have bigger upside.

My initial thought is I don't think you'd get the results that you'd expect. For example, there was really only a handful run first teams all year last season, and 2 of the biggest ones (Seattle, Washington) had rookie QBs, so I'm guessing they won't be as run first this year as they were last year. The large majority of teams are balanced or pass first. What I would expect the outcome of that research to be is that whether a team is run-first or pass-first is pretty well irrelevant, what matters much more is what team rushes the ball the most. For example, even though New England was a pass-first team, they were 2nd in the league in rushing attempts since their offense ran so many plays. In Green Bay's case, I think a similar outcome is possible. They can be a pass-first team, but if their offense is so good their RBs will get tonnes of carries just because they're running lots of plays, are getting lots of first downs, and have the ball all game long. Though I also wouldn't be surprised if the relationship between team rush attempts and individual RB production isn't all that significant, as a third of the league ran the ball 460+ times last season, so even if a RB got just 60% of their team's carries, that's 280+ carries a season.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

In theory they could have had Lacy as their RB 2 and Frankln as their RB 3 on their board. Just so happens Franklin fell, in this case their "opinion" of the players may be darn near identical.

actually..........in theory they could have had Franklin rated higher but knew they could get him later....

 

[Concept Coop]

In theory they could have had Lacy as their RB 2 and Frankln as their RB 3 on their board. Just so happens Franklin fell, in this case their "opinion" of the players may be darn near identical.

actually..........in theory they could have had Franklin rated higher but knew they could get him later....

In theory, KC could have wanted Lacy over Fisher, thinking he'd fall to round 3. Their gamble almost paid off.

 

[Keith Lewis]

RBBC hell!!!

Don't want either to tell the truth. But since Bloom prefers Franklin I'd take him if push came to shove.

 

[Stinkin Ref]

In theory they could have had Lacy as their RB 2 and Frankln as their RB 3 on their board. Just so happens Franklin fell, in this case their "opinion" of the players may be darn near identical.

actually..........in theory they could have had Franklin rated higher but knew they could get him later....

In theory, KC could have wanted Lacy over Fisher, thinking he'd fall to round 3. Their gamble almost paid off.

exactly...so that is why what round someone is taken in doesn't really matter when talking about value.....there really is no definition of "first round talent" or "second round talent" , etc....is the 33rd pick second round talent....or could he be 1st round talent that slid because teams 1-32 (or in this case not even that since some teams didn't pick at all in the 1st and some picked as much as 3 times) had needs elsewhere.....is the 33rd pick the same talent as the 64th pick....both 2nd round right.....and 64 must have way more talent then 65 cause it's a whole round later.....

 

[smackdaddies]

None of this discussion really matters now unless your doing your rookie draft before camps. And if you are, your screwed if you have to rely on a packer rookie RB

 

[ptsteelers]

Coop, you love Lacy...we get it. We're not saying Lacy can't be a good FF or NFL RB. We're saying that Jonathan Franklin has reduced his value. You don't think so, that's fine. But Bloom/Me/several others have stated that by pairing Franklin with Lacy, it has reduced both players values. This option shouldn't be ignored

I've been realistic about Lacy's value, post NFL draft. It's certainly down, and there are certainly concerns.

I am talking about investment, and what a late 4th round pick means. Should Charles and Lynch be worried? Was Gerhart drafted to compete with Peterson? Pierce with Rice? Turbin with Lynch?

I understand that Lacy is not Lynch, Charles, or Peterson. I understand that because of that, Franklin's path to carries is more clear. But he's still a 4th round rookie pick drafted to provide depth. I don't see 1st round rookie draft value there.

Hey Coop, this question is not one trying to bash your argument about the 4th round pick stance you have, but I keep seeing you talk about how it is not unusual for a team to draft a back-up in the 4th, and I agree with that statement. But my question is, and not just for you, but for anyone (as I truly don't know) ...

How many times has a team drafted a "back-up running back" in the same year, 2 rounds after drafting the initial player?

 

[DropKick]

I agree with those saying that the best approach is to generally ignore draft round at this point in favor of examining talent, opportunity/situation, and health/injury history.

But could we find anyone with a better track record than the NFL? 50% hit rate in round one, less than 25% in round 2. It just goes down from there, the 4th giving us a couple RB1s a decade. Throwing that information out the window, and ignoring what 32 professional franchises think and invest - that seems a bit much.

I side with COOP here... The vast majority of us are not true talent evaluators. We are more information gatherers. And the NFL evaluators saw Lacy as a 2nd round talent and Franklin as a 4th. I understand the draft isn't an exact science but, in general, the 2nd rounder is more likely to be the better back.

I think his point is NOT that Lacy is definitively the better back - but he isn't worthy of a top 10 pick. I agree with that. If you think Franklin impacts Lacy's value, how much does Lacy impact Franklin? I'd have a very tough time pulling the trigger on Franklin except in formats where RBs were very difficult to acquire and/or I had a huge hole at the position.

ETA: Fortunately, our draft is in August so there is plenty of time to watch this situation develop.

 

[DropKick]

Coop, you love Lacy...we get it. We're not saying Lacy can't be a good FF or NFL RB. We're saying that Jonathan Franklin has reduced his value. You don't think so, that's fine. But Bloom/Me/several others have stated that by pairing Franklin with Lacy, it has reduced both players values. This option shouldn't be ignored

I've been realistic about Lacy's value, post NFL draft. It's certainly down, and there are certainly concerns.

I am talking about investment, and what a late 4th round pick means. Should Charles and Lynch be worried? Was Gerhart drafted to compete with Peterson? Pierce with Rice? Turbin with Lynch?

I understand that Lacy is not Lynch, Charles, or Peterson. I understand that because of that, Franklin's path to carries is more clear. But he's still a 4th round rookie pick drafted to provide depth. I don't see 1st round rookie draft value there.

Hey Coop, this question is not one trying to bash your argument about the 4th round pick stance you have, but I keep seeing you talk about how it is not unusual for a team to draft a back-up in the 4th, and I agree with that statement. But my question is, and not just for you, but for anyone (as I truly don't know) ...

How many times has a team drafted a "back-up running back" in the same year, 2 rounds after drafting the initial player?

Well, for example, the Patriots drafted Vereen and Ridley (both 2nd round I think) in the same draft. It doesn't surprise me the packers grabbed more than one back given the void at the position last year. I don't read anything into this.

 

[Grigs Allmoon]

Coop, you love Lacy...we get it. We're not saying Lacy can't be a good FF or NFL RB. We're saying that Jonathan Franklin has reduced his value. You don't think so, that's fine. But Bloom/Me/several others have stated that by pairing Franklin with Lacy, it has reduced both players values. This option shouldn't be ignored

I've been realistic about Lacy's value, post NFL draft. It's certainly down, and there are certainly concerns.

I am talking about investment, and what a late 4th round pick means. Should Charles and Lynch be worried?

there are way more important things to factor in when assessing value.......what round they were drafted in should be pretty low in that list....

 

[Concept Coop]

Coop, you love Lacy...we get it. We're not saying Lacy can't be a good FF or NFL RB. We're saying that Jonathan Franklin has reduced his value. You don't think so, that's fine. But Bloom/Me/several others have stated that by pairing Franklin with Lacy, it has reduced both players values. This option shouldn't be ignored

I've been realistic about Lacy's value, post NFL draft. It's certainly down, and there are certainly concerns.

I am talking about investment, and what a late 4th round pick means. Should Charles and Lynch be worried? Was Gerhart drafted to compete with Peterson? Pierce with Rice? Turbin with Lynch?

I understand that Lacy is not Lynch, Charles, or Peterson. I understand that because of that, Franklin's path to carries is more clear. But he's still a 4th round rookie pick drafted to provide depth. I don't see 1st round rookie draft value there.

Hey Coop, this question is not one trying to bash your argument about the 4th round pick stance you have, but I keep seeing you talk about how it is not unusual for a team to draft a back-up in the 4th, and I agree with that statement. But my question is, and not just for you, but for anyone (as I truly don't know) ...

How many times has a team drafted a "back-up running back" in the same year, 2 rounds after drafting the initial player?

The Cowboys drafted Felix in the first, Choice in the 4th, and had Barber on the roster. That's the first one that comes to mind. I'm sure there are others, but I'd have to look.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

I agree with those saying that the best approach is to generally ignore draft round at this point in favor of examining talent, opportunity/situation, and health/injury history.

But could we find anyone with a better track record than the NFL? 50% hit rate in round one, less than 25% in round 2. It just goes down from there, the 4th giving us a couple RB1s a decade. Throwing that information out the window, and ignoring what 32 professional franchises think and invest - that seems a bit much.

I side with COOP here... The vast majority of us are not true talent evaluators. We are more information gatherers. And the NFL evaluators saw Lacy as a 2nd round talent and Franklin as a 4th. I understand the draft isn't an exact science but, in general, the 2nd rounder is more likely to be the better back.

I think his point is NOT that Lacy is definitively the better back - but he isn't worthy of a top 10 pick. I agree with that. If you think Franklin impacts Lacy's value, how much does Lacy impact Franklin? I'd have a very tough time pulling the trigger on Franklin except in formats where RBs were very difficult to acquire and/or I had a huge hole at the position.

ETA: Fortunately, our draft is in August so there is plenty of time to watch this situation develop.

That's not honest.

Lacy was the next to last pick of the 2nd, and that team had already passed on him in the 2nd as well. Trading down.

So every team that could have drafted him in the 2nd, did pass on him (as the Seahawks also traded down). The Packers didnt pass on him twice though.

Then at the end of the 4th, that same team was willing to trade UP for Franklin.

 

[Concept Coop]

That's not honest.

Lacy was the next to last pick of the 2nd, and that team had already passed on him in the 2nd as well. Trading down.

So every team that could have drafted him in the 2nd, did pass on him (as the Seahawks also traded down). The Packers didnt pass on him twice though.

Then in the 4th, that same team was willing to trade UP for Franklin.

Lacy was the 31st pick in the 2nd round. Franklin was the 28th pick in the 4th. Almost exactly two rounds apart.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

I agree with those saying that the best approach is to generally ignore draft round at this point in favor of examining talent, opportunity/situation, and health/injury history.

But could we find anyone with a better track record than the NFL? 50% hit rate in round one, less than 25% in round 2. It just goes down from there, the 4th giving us a couple RB1s a decade. Throwing that information out the window, and ignoring what 32 professional franchises think and invest - that seems a bit much.

I side with COOP here... The vast majority of us are not true talent evaluators. We are more information gatherers. And the NFL evaluators saw Lacy as a 2nd round talent and Franklin as a 4th. I understand the draft isn't an exact science but, in general, the 2nd rounder is more likely to be the better back.

I think his point is NOT that Lacy is definitively the better back - but he isn't worthy of a top 10 pick. I agree with that. If you think Franklin impacts Lacy's value, how much does Lacy impact Franklin? I'd have a very tough time pulling the trigger on Franklin except in formats where RBs were very difficult to acquire and/or I had a huge hole at the position.

ETA: Fortunately, our draft is in August so there is plenty of time to watch this situation develop.

That's not honest.

Lacy was the next to last pick of the 2nd, and that team had already passed on him in the 2nd as well. Trading down.

So every team that could have drafted him in the 2nd, did pass on him (as the Seahawks also traded down). The Packers didnt pass on him twice though.

Then in the 4th, that same team was willing to trade UP for Franklin.

Pretty well every team passed on Franklin in the 4th round too, so not sure what you're trying to get at there.

Also, I think you capitalized the wrong portion of your last sentence, it should read: The Packers traded up to draft Franklin at the end of the FOURTH ROUND. The fact that the Packers were willing to wait til the end of the 4th round before trading up to get him is what's significant, not the simple fact that they traded up to get him.

 

[Pipes]

I agree though that the RB1 in Green Bay isn't all that great.

I disagree. Ryan Grant had back to back 1200 yard seasons in 2008 and 2009. It seems both Lacy and Franklin have more talent than Grant ever did. I also think, with the amount of sacks Rodgers has taken, McCarthy and Thompson realize its time to get serious about the running game.

 

[Tornacl]

I have a related question. For those people planning on taking Lacy (I'll assume with the 1.03 or higher), at what point do you feel you have to grab Franklin?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

THIS GIANT BLANK SPACE BROUGHT TO YOU BY THIS HORRIBLE NEW FORUM Pretty well every team passed on Franklin in the 4th round too, so not sure what you're trying to get at there. Also, I think you capitalized the wrong portion of your last sentence, it should read: The Packers traded up to draft Franklin at the end of the FOURTH ROUND. The fact that the Packers were willing to wait til the end of the 4th round before trading up to get him is what's significant, not the simple fact that they traded up to get him.

Ill edit to add end of the 4th.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

I have a related question. For those people planning on taking Lacy (I'll assume with the 1.03 or higher), at what point do you feel you have to grab Franklin?

I can only speak for myself, but if I decide to invest a top 3 pick in Lacy, it's because I don't think he has anything to fear from Franklin and I'll scoop him up if its convenient. I certainly won't go out of my way to trade into the mid/late 1st where he is going in many drafts. If I felt I needed to make that investment then Lacy wouldn't be my choice at the top of the draft.

 

[dollarbill13]

Some thoughts on the Lacy/Franklin article/debate (FWIW - I rely mostly on the Waldman scouting reports on these two):

• It is noted that Franklin is a good pass catcher while Lacy will be limited in the passing game. Just looking at last season, Franklin had 33 catches compared to Lacy's 22. However, UCLA attempted 50% more passes than Alabama did. When reviewing Waldman's notes on how they were used, he said that they both were primarily used as outlet receivers. Lacy has a positive note for catching with his hands. It would seem to me that they are both in the adequate range as pass catchers. Not bad, but certainly not a key trait for either.
• Bloom says that Lacy has a "higher ceiling as a pure talent" but "looks like a career committee back". I'm curious as to what would cause that distrinction, especially given that the consensus is that Lacy is a better pass blocker.
• Two of the Anti Lacy comments reference his durability. I think it's worth noting that, while he has been injured at times, he really hasn't missed any games. The dedication concerns seem to really only stem from his pro day. Given the fact that he's played (well) through numerous injuries, I don't think it's unreasonable to take his comment of only having 2 weeks to prepare for his pro day at face value.
• Lacy was originally projected to be a late-first or early-second rounder. He ended up being drafted in the late 2nd, which was called out as a negative in the article. However, Franklin was generally regarded as a 2nd or 3rd rounder and ended up going at the end of the 4th.

As a Packer fan I'm really happy to have both of these guys on the team. From everything I've seen and read, it seems like picking between the two (in terms of who is a better runner) a matter of personal preference. If you want to pick Franklin over Lacy because you think Lacy will get hurt, that's fine, but I just feel like the Lacy vs. Franklin article downplays Lacy's strengths and exaggerates his weaknesses.

 

[Catbird]

I don't think a good team cares, once they get to camp, where a guy was picked. Rookies at the same position (except maybe where one is a prospective franchise QB) come in and compete. I think they play the better guy - and I put GB in that good team catagory. What the late 2nd v. late 4th does say is that when GB got to pick between these guys, knowing quite likely they would only get one of them, they took Lacy. They then didn't take Franklin with their next two picks, showing far less concern about not getting Franklin than about not getting Lacy (although not then being worried about Franklin may have has a lot to do with having picked Lacy already). I still think these guys will go to camp and compete openly and they will win the roles they earn. Its just pretty clear going in - which is all we have - that GB likes Lacy more, and perhaps a lot more, than Franklin. Like all pre-conceptions, that can change completely with the realities of camp.

The circular argument that if Lacy does well that will bring defenses to focus on him and help the passing game more thanit helps Lacy is not rational. He will have to be getting significantly more production than earlier GB backs to command significantly more attention. And no opposing D is going to be forgetting about the Packer passing game.

I don't think GB will ever run like Petersen and the Vikes or Foster and the Texans - why would they quiet the incredible passing game they have created. But the comment that the passing team Pats ran the 2nd most rushing plays was insightful. Better offense means more offensive plays of all kinds and, I would argue, also more situations to rush out the clock late.

If either Lacy or Franklin or both are productive, I would expect a clear increase in GB RB carries. If one guy stays healthy and gets the lion's share, he should be a low RB1. If they split, even Franklin winning the 3rd down and a couple of series per game as people have suggested, Lacy, if healthy, is probably a mid-RB2. The reason this choice is worth the discussion is because its so hard to predict, but worth so much to get it right. If either of these guys just takes over the job - I have a much harder time seeing Franklin taking the heavy lifting from Lacy than the other way around, but if either one - the owner who guessed right is sitting on a goldmine with perhaps the 1.04 or 1.05. Just like bell or Bernard or Ball if they take over and are the real deal.

Haunting is that perhaps no RB in this draft is worth anything more than a lower round 2 pick, with barely a fantasy starter role to be won between them.

 

[Warhogs]

I have a related question. For those people planning on taking Lacy (I'll assume with the 1.03 or higher), at what point do you feel you have to grab Franklin?

I you do this there is a good chance you will never have a chance to grab Franklin to hedge our bets unless you have another pick somewhere in the 1.06 to 1.12 range. He seems to be going mid to late round 1. If I had a top 3 and a mid to late round 1 I might see what veteran I could get with those two picks.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Some thoughts on the Lacy/Franklin article/debate (FWIW - I rely mostly on the Waldman scouting reports on these two):

• It is noted that Franklin is a good pass catcher while Lacy will be limited in the passing game. Just looking at last season, Franklin had 33 catches compared to Lacy's 22. However, UCLA attempted 50% more passes than Alabama did. When reviewing Waldman's notes on how they were used, he said that they both were primarily used as outlet receivers. Lacy has a positive note for catching with his hands. It would seem to me that they are both in the adequate range as pass catchers. Not bad, but certainly not a key trait for either.
• Bloom says that Lacy has a "higher ceiling as a pure talent" but "looks like a career committee back". I'm curious as to what would cause that distrinction, especially given that the consensus is that Lacy is a better pass blocker.
• Two of the Anti Lacy comments reference his durability. I think it's worth noting that, while he has been injured at times, he really hasn't missed any games. The dedication concerns seem to really only stem from his pro day. Given the fact that he's played (well) through numerous injuries, I don't think it's unreasonable to take his comment of only having 2 weeks to prepare for his pro day at face value.
• Lacy was originally projected to be a late-first or early-second rounder. He ended up being drafted in the late 2nd, which was called out as a negative in the article. However, Franklin was generally regarded as a 2nd or 3rd rounder and ended up going at the end of the 4th.

As a Packer fan I'm really happy to have both of these guys on the team. From everything I've seen and read, it seems like picking between the two (in terms of who is a better runner) a matter of personal preference. If you want to pick Franklin over Lacy because you think Lacy will get hurt, that's fine, but I just feel like the Lacy vs. Franklin article downplays Lacy's strengths and exaggerates his weaknesses.

Lacy is the better pure talent because he's bigger and his movement skills are rarer when combined with his size. He looks like a career committee back because of his durability questions.

 

[The Comedian]

The last 6th round pick at RB to matter was drafted in 2012. The last UDFA RB to matter was Arian Foster. or was it Vick Ballard? Or . . .

I don't think it's wise to use data that way with round and what matters, but I'm an unabashed, look at the player play type of guy . . . draft position is often about risk management as much as talent, if not more in some cases.

The trends are too hard to ignore, in my opinion. Sure, Ballard was a 5th rounder that worked out, Morris was a 6th, and Foster wasn't drafted. But it seems we're pointing at exceptions and calling it a rule. For every Ballard, there are countless Dan Herrons and Mike Harts. If we make it a practice of using top 6-12 picks on said players, we're going to lose.

ETA: And show me the guy that predicted Foster, Ballard, Morris, and drafted them accordingly. I'll take his word for it, but, the rest is hindsight and outliers.

I don't think people are ignoring the trends, I think these examples are being put forth to contradict your statement that "the last RB taken in the 4th round that mattered was in 2005."

 

[smackdaddies]

If the RB situation has improved (and I think it has), what that means is RB will do well against teams that stay in cover two and Rodgers will light up teams that drop out of it (think Houston last year, which for some reason did not play a down of cover two)

At a minimum the Packers 43 game drought of no 100 game rushers should end pretty quickly

Magic 8 ball says....

1,200 yards and 7 td for lacy, with 15 rcpt and 200 yards

450 yards and 2 td for Franklin, 28 rcpt and 500 yards, 2 td rcvng

5000 yards and 56 td for Rodgers, btw....Packers crush their way to a Super Bowl win

 

[jsharlan]

The last 6th round pick at RB to matter was drafted in 2012. The last UDFA RB to matter was Arian Foster. or was it Vick Ballard? Or . . .

I don't think it's wise to use data that way with round and what matters, but I'm an unabashed, look at the player play type of guy . . . draft position is often about risk management as much as talent, if not more in some cases.

Get back to work Matt, I need to see that Post Draft RSP!

 

[Concept Coop]

I don't think people are ignoring the trends, I think these examples are being put forth to contradict your statement that "the last RB taken in the 4th round that mattered was in 2005."

In terms of actual production - who else has there been? There was Barber and Jacobs. Miller is an example of a guy mattering, in terms of value, but we'll have to see what he does this season, and moving forward.

Perhaps I chose my words poorly, but I don't agree that draft position doesn't matter. The trends are pretty clear, and while there are some exceptions - they're few and far between. Show me someone that can pick out the Ballards and Morrisses with any regularity, and I that person might be able to make the claim that draft spot doesn't matter. But I don't know if anyone meets that criteria - I sure as hell don't. I hit on Foster and Ballard, but like another poster pointed out, they were simply low probability gambles that paid off. Certainly nothing I can use to suggest a track record.

Bloom and Waldman are paid to share THEIR opinions, and both do a damn fine job. So I understand and respect them sticking to their guns. But when it comes down to me investing my draft picks - what the professionals think and, thus, invest, is a HUGE part of the puzzle. Especially when the trends are so clear.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

It seems like a stretch to suggest Franklin's value being in the 6-12 range, or close to Lacy’s. I don't think you could justify that if he was the first back taken by GB, after going late in the fourth, even.

In theory they could have had Lacy as their RB 2 and Frankln as their RB 3 on their board. Just so happens Franklin fell, in this case their "opinion" of the players may be darn near identical.

yes. franklin going in the 4th at a position they had already taken suggests that he had a 3rd round grade, if not a 2nd. Most players have grades at least a round higher by the team selecting than the round they were taken in

So they had a first round grade on Lacy?