Official Bishop Sankey - Best RB in the 2014 Draft (2 Viewers)

[jurb26]

The Donald Brown comparison is perfect IMO. Good at most things, great at nothing.

I don't think the brown comp is good at all. I see a smaller version of A. Foster. Maybe a smaller version of Foster won't work in the NFL, maybe it will. I think Sankey is more creative, has better vision and better balance than Brown.

 

[werdnoynek]

The Donald Brown comparison is perfect IMO. Good at most things, great at nothing.

I don't think the brown comp is good at all. I see a smaller version of A. Foster. Maybe a smaller version of Foster won't work in the NFL, maybe it will. I think Sankey is more creative, has better vision and better balance than Brown.

I can see that.

 

[mvereb]

You guys are leaving out arguably the most telling combine drill for running backs--the short shuttle. The short shuttle and 3-cone drill determine how quick, sudden, and elusive an RB can be in space. Sankey is far superior to Brown in both tests. I'm not going to bother posting my research because it took a lot of time and effort to put together. I would re-evaluate your stance on vertical leaping ability as well for RBs.

So far, the comparisons have gone from a 'poor man's 'Lynch/Martin' to a 'poor man's LeSean McCoy'. Again, a little research helps. Good luck.

 

[tdmills]

Earlier in the year EBF made the comment that we needed to see what he had "under the hood" before he could sign off on him. He has kind of backed off of that statement and still doesn't like Sankey even after he killed the combine.

I don't think his ceiling is on par with the truly elite talents (i.e. Peterson, Lynch, McCoy, Charles, Mathews, Spiller, Bush, Forte, Stewart, DeAngelo, Gore, MJD, Martin). He's a mediocre NFL talent.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=459397&view=&hl=&fromsearch=1

Now forte is elite and ebf said it!!! Wow how times have changed from the biggest forte hater.

I everyone has strengths and ebf is good at writing and numbers. Which is why he's high on jstew, Michael, mendenhall, dougie types at rb. Some times they pan out and other times they don't.

However he has weaknesses as well which include the good at a lot but not great at one thing prospects like forte and Sankey. Will Sankey pan out? Maybe, but ebf has an obvious bias against these types of players.

 

[Biabreakable]

On the same token tdmills I have a bias for RB like Sankey, Gio Bernard, Ray Rice, MJD, DeAngelo Williams, Clinton Portis, Ahmad Bradshaw, Dalton HIlliard, Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith.

As a matter of fact look through the top performers in FF at the RB position and you will see more often than not it is these smaller RB who are making major hay in the NFL and moreso than the big bruiser RB that people seem to be more attracted to.

He fits the mold of a smallish but very productive RB capable of being a threat as a receiver as well as a runner. That is why I never had any doubt about Sankey being the best RB from this draft class (for FF mind you). He fits the same profile of almost every RB who has interested me as RB prospects before.

I would like to see Sankey demonstrate more power to push the pile and to get yards after contact than he has. But other than this weakness he seems like the complete package and everything I am looking for in a RB prospect.

 

[Xue]

I don't think his ceiling is on par with the truly elite talents (i.e. Peterson, Lynch, McCoy, Charles, Mathews, Spiller, Bush, Forte, Stewart, DeAngelo, Gore, MJD, Martin). He's a mediocre NFL talent. If he lands in a wide open situation, he'll have short-term value. If not, there will be at least 4-5 RBs as talented as him coming into the league next season to compete for jobs.

Peterson, Lynch, Charles, Spiller, Bush, Stewart, and Martin are the only "elite talents" from that list. Being an "elite fantasy producer" is different from being an elite talent.

In a vacuum, McCoy, Mathews, Forte, DeAngelo, Gore, and MJD could be considered "mediocre".

I mean did you really label all of these guys as "elite" before the draft? RB is a position where there is simply so many "mediocre" talents on rosters, but not enough carries to go around. You're only mediocre until you start producing and shed the label. Umm...Arian Foster, Alfred Morris, etc.

Chris Ivory is an "elite" talent to me, but the guy can't stay healthy. Being able to stay healthy could arguably be considered a "talent" to an extent I guess. But RB is such a volatile position, I tend to not worry about injuries.

As I always say, don't be blinded by production.

I see Sankey's floor as Shane Vereen/Pierre Thomas, his middle projection as Zac Stacy, and his ceiling as Ray Rice/MJD. There's nothing to suggest that he can't be a 250+ carry 50 reception producer in time "in the right situation". Of course, that is said about 30-40 other guys.

 

[EBF]

Peterson, Lynch, Charles, Spiller, Bush, Stewart, and Martin are the only "elite talents" from that list. Being an "elite fantasy producer" is different from being an elite talent.

In a vacuum, McCoy, Mathews, Forte, DeAngelo, Gore, and MJD could be considered "mediocre".

I'm not going to get into a debate about who's elite and who isn't, as that's not going to be productive. I don't agree with all of those calls though. Regardless of whatever they looked like as draft prospects, D-Will, MJD, McCoy, and Gore would qualify as elite NFL backs in my book.

Bear in mind that there is a difference between an elite prospect and, ultimately, an elite talent. Brandon Marshall was not an elite prospect. As it turns out, he WAS an elite talent. Same deal with Tom Brady. What people thought of them when they were coming into the league is irrelevant at this point.

Being an "elite fantasy producer" is different from being an elite talent.

In the short term, sure. Plenty of stiffs can put up top 10-15 FF numbers if given a favorable opportunity. That's just the thing though. Over the long term, only elite talents get that opportunity. The mediocrities of the world like BJGE, Ridley, Hillis, Greene, and Blount don't last as unquestioned starters.

To rank a RB as an elite dynasty FF commodity without knowing anything about his team situation, I'd have to think he's talented enough to keep a starting job for the duration of his prime. So he basically needs to meet that Portis/ADP/Gore/MJD/CJ2K standard.

I don't think Sankey is that good. I think he's more of a guy who will need the right opportunity to have value. You could say he's a Zac Stacy type. Or maybe a slightly more rugged Felix Jones. Perfectly capable of producing in spurts. Not necessarily a guy who's going to stave off challengers long term. Next year there will be talents like Gurley, Dyer, and Gordon coming into the league and guys like Stacy and Sankey will have to fight them off to keep a job.

The less talented the starter, the more likely he is to be pipped. That's why it's generally a sucker bet to pay "difference-maker" prices for guys who derive most of their value from their short-term opportunity and not their ability. If people think Sankey is on par with McCoy/Charles/Gore/MJD then they're in for a rude awakening. If they think he's a mediocre NFL player who can thrive in the right situation ala LeVeon Bell and Zac Stacy, well I don't disagree at all.

 

[cstu]

I don't think Sankey is that good. I think he's more of a guy who will need the right opportunity to have value. You could say he's a Zac Stacy type. Or maybe a slightly more rugged Felix Jones. Perfectly capable of producing in spurts. Not necessarily a guy who's going to stave off challengers long term.

What's the difference between Sankey and Gio?

In today's NFL it seems like if you're reasonably productive, can pass block and don't fumble you can keep a job since teams don't want to spend picks on RB's - at least through your rookie contract. The guy that epitomizes that is Shonn Greene, who was very mediocre yet the Jets kept as their starter and never tried to replace with higher than a 4th round RB.

 

[MAC_32]

I don't think Sankey is that good. I think he's more of a guy who will need the right opportunity to have value. You could say he's a Zac Stacy type. Or maybe a slightly more rugged Felix Jones. Perfectly capable of producing in spurts. Not necessarily a guy who's going to stave off challengers long term.

What's the difference between Sankey and Gio?

In today's NFL it seems like if you're reasonably productive, can pass block and don't fumble you can keep a job since teams don't want to spend picks on RB's - at least through your rookie contract. The guy that epitomizes that is Shonn Greene, who was very mediocre yet the Jets kept as their starter and never tried to replace with higher than a 4th round RB.

Gio creates in traffic and doesn't go down easily, Sankey has not and he does.

 

[Brewtown]

Earlier in the year EBF made the comment that we needed to see what he had "under the hood" before he could sign off on him. He has kind of backed off of that statement and still doesn't like Sankey even after he killed the combine.

I don't think his ceiling is on par with the truly elite talents (i.e. Peterson, Lynch, McCoy, Charles, Mathews, Spiller, Bush, Forte, Stewart, DeAngelo, Gore, MJD, Martin). He's a mediocre NFL talent.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=459397&view=&hl=&fromsearch=1Now forte is elite and ebf said it!!! Wow how times have changed from the biggest forte hater.

I everyone has strengths and ebf is good at writing and numbers. Which is why he's high on jstew, Michael, mendenhall, dougie types at rb. Some times they pan out and other times they don't.

However he has weaknesses as well which include the good at a lot but not great at one thing prospects like forte and Sankey. Will Sankey pan out? Maybe, but ebf has an obvious bias against these types of players.

So he has struck out big-time before. Doesn't surprise me...

 

[DAG]

On the same token tdmills I have a bias for RB like Sankey, Gio Bernard, Ray Rice, MJD, DeAngelo Williams, Clinton Portis, Ahmad Bradshaw, Dalton HIlliard, Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith.

As a matter of fact look through the top performers in FF at the RB position and you will see more often than not it is these smaller RB who are making major hay in the NFL and moreso than the big bruiser RB that people seem to be more attracted to.

He fits the mold of a smallish but very productive RB capable of being a threat as a receiver as well as a runner. That is why I never had any doubt about Sankey being the best RB from this draft class (for FF mind you). He fits the same profile of almost every RB who has interested me as RB prospects before.

I would like to see Sankey demonstrate more power to push the pile and to get yards after contact than he has. But other than this weakness he seems like the complete package and everything I am looking for in a RB prospect.

I have the same bias. In ppr dynasty leagues to my mind one of the best ways to respond to platooning trends in the NFL is to target smaller backs who will likely retain an all-purpose role in their offense. There are no guarantees there of course, but these guys are almost always undervalued in rookie drafts (see Gio last season) and they provide steady--and sometimes excellent--weekly production.

 

[werdnoynek]

I don't think Sankey is that good. I think he's more of a guy who will need the right opportunity to have value. You could say he's a Zac Stacy type. Or maybe a slightly more rugged Felix Jones. Perfectly capable of producing in spurts. Not necessarily a guy who's going to stave off challengers long term.

What's the difference between Sankey and Gio?

In today's NFL it seems like if you're reasonably productive, can pass block and don't fumble you can keep a job since teams don't want to spend picks on RB's - at least through your rookie contract. The guy that epitomizes that is Shonn Greene, who was very mediocre yet the Jets kept as their starter and never tried to replace with higher than a 4th round RB.

Gio creates in traffic and doesn't go down easily, Sankey has not and he does.

Yep. There's a wiggle when you see Gio in game that is nonexistent when you watch Sankey.

 

[jurb26]

I don't think Sankey is that good. I think he's more of a guy who will need the right opportunity to have value. You could say he's a Zac Stacy type. Or maybe a slightly more rugged Felix Jones. Perfectly capable of producing in spurts. Not necessarily a guy who's going to stave off challengers long term.

What's the difference between Sankey and Gio?

In today's NFL it seems like if you're reasonably productive, can pass block and don't fumble you can keep a job since teams don't want to spend picks on RB's - at least through your rookie contract. The guy that epitomizes that is Shonn Greene, who was very mediocre yet the Jets kept as their starter and never tried to replace with higher than a 4th round RB.

Gio creates in traffic and doesn't go down easily, Sankey has not and he does.

Yep. There's a wiggle when you see Gio in game that is nonexistent when you watch Sankey.

I don't really like the Gio comps, at all. They may have similar measurables but they play different. Sankey isn't going to wow you with his cuts like Gio does. Gio has very dramatic cuts and runs with a lot of lateral movement. Sankey runs more with smaller cuts and keeps his pads square to the LOS. I'm not saying one is better than the other, just they are different. I think both can work. I do worry a little about Sankey's leg drive at times. It's not that he doesn't posses the power IMO. It's that he doesn't always pump his legs through contact. When he does you can see he posses it. He just doesn't do it as often as I'd like.

 

[Brewtown]

2014 NFL Draft: Wadsworth native Bishop Sankey eager to prove he’s best running back in this year’s class

By Nate Ulrich

In Bishop Sankey’s opinion, the best running back in this year’s NFL Draft hails from Northeast Ohio.

Although his roots are not mentioned in his bio on the University of Washington’s athletics website, Sankey was born in Wadsworth and lived there with his grandparents, William and Carol Becker, until he was 7. He also has family in Akron — grandmother Celia Sankey lives on the East side — and his mother, Julie Becker, lives in Cleveland. Several relatives plan to visit him and his father, Chris Sankey, in the San Pedro neighborhood of Los Angeles to watch the draft unfold May 8-10.

No matter how it pans out, Sankey is eager to validate his theory about where he fits into this year’s class of running backs.

“I think I’m at the top,” Sankey said in a recent phone interview with the Beacon Journal. “I think I’m the best all-around running back in this class. I think I’ve proven that the past few years. I think I’ve proven that I can move the ball on the ground, pass protect and catch out of the backfield.

“I’m a guy that prides myself on work ethic, not only on the field, but off the field. This past year, I had all-academic Pac-12 honors as well, and that was something that I was proud of. I’m the guy that comes with the same attitude each day, and I always look for things that I can get better at, not only in football, but in life in general.”

An Akron native and former running back at East High School, Sankey’s father is a technical sergeant in the Air Force who works with the ROTC program at UCLA. As a child, the younger Sankey moved from Wadsworth to Dayton when his dad was stationed at Wright-Patterson Air Force base. When he was 14, father and son relocated again to Spokane, Wash., where Bishop Sankey became a football star at Gonzaga Preparatory School.

Sankey vacillated between Northeast Ohio and his new homes as a fourth-grader and again as a freshman in high school because his father was deployed overseas. He played his first season of youth football in Wadsworth in fourth grade. He attended Wadsworth High School for about four months after he wrapped up his freshman football season in Washington. He returned to Spokane for the end of his freshman year and stayed at Gonzaga Prep for the rest of his high school days.

“But when people say where are you from, I definitely say I’m from Ohio originally and let them know everything that happened when I was there,” said Sankey, who has been training at EXOS in Carson, Calif.

The 5-foot-9, 209-pound Sankey said he has had a few private workouts and a few pre-draft visits with teams, though he declined to reveal which ones. Despite signing Ben Tate in March, the Browns are among the franchises interested in the possibility of drafting a running back next month.

“I think it’s solid running back class,” Browns coach Mike Pettine said during a conference call two weeks ago. “We’d be thrilled to get one. We’ve done our homework on the guys that are available in this draft. If the situation’s right and we have the right grade on a running back at that time, we’ll turn the card in for it.”

Sankey, 21, would embrace a homecoming.

“The Browns, I feel like they are a great club, and I would love to play for them,” said Sankey, who ran primarily in a zone-blocking scheme at Washington. “It would be right smack-dab where all my roots are, where all my family is. I know people in my family would be proud, and I would love to be part of the organization.”

A junior at Washington, Sankey is taking online classes and remains determined to earn a degree in communications. He sounded like an NFL insider while explaining where he expects to be picked.

“I’m hearing from different sources that I should go in the second round,” said Sankey, who had 616 carries for 3,309 yards (5.4 average) and 36 touchdowns to go along with 61 catches for 553 yards and a touchdown in his final two collegiate seasons.

NFL Network draft guru Mike Mayock ranks Sankey as the No. 1 running back prospect this year, followed by Ohio State’s Carlos Hyde, Louisiana State’s Jeremy Hill, Auburn’s Tre Mason and Boston College’s Andre Williams. NFL.com’s Nolan Nawrocki ranks Sankey sixth with Hyde atop the list of running backs in his draft guide.

“I do want to be the first back taken,” Sankey said. “I think it says a lot about what you bring to the table and who you are as a player if you are the first guy taken at your position. That’s really been my goal.”

This could become the second consecutive draft in which no running backs are selected during the first round. Last year, it happened for the first time since the common draft began in 1967, fueling the argument that the position has been devalued in the NFL.

“Maybe I’m biased, but I think the running back is one of the most valuable players on the offense,” Sankey said. “Not only do we run the ball and take pressure off the quarterback and the passing game, but we also protect the quarterback, block for the quarterback. We’re also used out of the backfield as an asset in the passing game. Not only that, I think a lot of running backs contribute a lot on special teams as well, whether it’s returning the ball on kick return or punt return or blocking for the returners. I think running the ball is essential to winning games, especially once it gets into the winter.”

Sankey believes he’ll be able to do all of those things at the next level, and he’s aiming to represent Northeast Ohio well no matter which team gives him a shot to show it.

 

[Biabreakable]

On the same token tdmills I have a bias for RB like Sankey, Gio Bernard, Ray Rice, MJD, DeAngelo Williams, Clinton Portis, Ahmad Bradshaw, Dalton HIlliard, Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith.

As a matter of fact look through the top performers in FF at the RB position and you will see more often than not it is these smaller RB who are making major hay in the NFL and moreso than the big bruiser RB that people seem to be more attracted to.

He fits the mold of a smallish but very productive RB capable of being a threat as a receiver as well as a runner. That is why I never had any doubt about Sankey being the best RB from this draft class (for FF mind you). He fits the same profile of almost every RB who has interested me as RB prospects before.

I would like to see Sankey demonstrate more power to push the pile and to get yards after contact than he has. But other than this weakness he seems like the complete package and everything I am looking for in a RB prospect.

I have the same bias. In ppr dynasty leagues to my mind one of the best ways to respond to platooning trends in the NFL is to target smaller backs who will likely retain an all-purpose role in their offense. There are no guarantees there of course, but these guys are almost always undervalued in rookie drafts (see Gio last season) and they provide steady--and sometimes excellent--weekly production.

I think this is an important point because as the NFL continues to trend more towards passing, the RB who fit into those types of offenses are the smaller shifty RBs who are receiving threats. Not that the track record for these players was poor before, it has been excellent. But players like this I think fit better than the bigger RB who were more sought out in the past when the league ran the ball more frequently.

You hear Cosell and others talk about who is a foundation RB or not. What they are talking about is a big RB who can grind a defense down over the course of a game. NFL teams today are looking for big plays and more yardage than this type of game plan. The odds are stacked against 3 yards and a cloud of dust. RIght or wrong this is solidly how the NFL is trending. So what may have been considered a foundation RB in the 80s or 90s is not very relevant to todays NFL which uses a lot more spread and passing formations.

 

[werdnoynek]

On the same token tdmills I have a bias for RB like Sankey, Gio Bernard, Ray Rice, MJD, DeAngelo Williams, Clinton Portis, Ahmad Bradshaw, Dalton HIlliard, Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith.

As a matter of fact look through the top performers in FF at the RB position and you will see more often than not it is these smaller RB who are making major hay in the NFL and moreso than the big bruiser RB that people seem to be more attracted to.

He fits the mold of a smallish but very productive RB capable of being a threat as a receiver as well as a runner. That is why I never had any doubt about Sankey being the best RB from this draft class (for FF mind you). He fits the same profile of almost every RB who has interested me as RB prospects before.

I would like to see Sankey demonstrate more power to push the pile and to get yards after contact than he has. But other than this weakness he seems like the complete package and everything I am looking for in a RB prospect.

I have the same bias. In ppr dynasty leagues to my mind one of the best ways to respond to platooning trends in the NFL is to target smaller backs who will likely retain an all-purpose role in their offense. There are no guarantees there of course, but these guys are almost always undervalued in rookie drafts (see Gio last season) and they provide steady--and sometimes excellent--weekly production.

I think this is an important point because as the NFL continues to trend more towards passing, the RB who fit into those types of offenses are the smaller shifty RBs who are receiving threats. Not that the track record for these players was poor before, it has been excellent. But players like this I think fit better than the bigger RB who were more sought out in the past when the league ran the ball more frequently.

You hear Cosell and others talk about who is a foundation RB or not. What they are talking about is a big RB who can grind a defense down over the course of a game. NFL teams today are looking for big plays and more yardage than this type of game plan. The odds are stacked against 3 yards and a cloud of dust. RIght or wrong this is solidly how the NFL is trending. So what may have been considered a foundation RB in the 80s or 90s is not very relevant to todays NFL which uses a lot more spread and passing formations.

Sankey seems to be stuck as a tweener of those types of backs though. He's not a grinder (like Lacy or Bell last year) and he's not a guy who excels in space (Gio last year) like the smaller, shifter guys you're referring to. How valuable is a guy like that in today's NFL? To echo EBF, Sankey isn't a difference maker by any means. He's got the ability to be successful, but a difference maker could make him a backup without much of a competition IMO.

 

[Biabreakable]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

 

[werdnoynek]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

I couldn't really care less what he weighs. He plays like a tweener to me.

ETA: Grinder in the NCAA ≠ grinder in NFL.

 

[mvereb]

Alike most players, it comes down to which situation he'll be placed into. Most pundits seem to think that Sankey, Tre Mason, and Carlos Hyde are this year's top RB prospects, so I'm expecting at least two of these players to come off the board by the end of the second round. I'm not a Hyde believer at all, but Sankey and Mason profile very similarly in terms of size, combine measurables, etc. Sankey caught more passes in college, so that may or may not give him a very slight edge.

In addition, Ian Rapoport reported that Mason needs wrist surgery and that may affect his draft stock. Mason is refuting that report, so it remains to be seen whether or not he needs surgery. Either way, NFL teams will know whether he needs surgery or not before they draft him. Mason's health may firmly entrench Sankey as the first runner off the board.

If the Titans draft Sankey in the second round, I think he immediately vaults up in the 5th-7th round in redraft. If the Eagles draft Sankey, they may keep him on ice and let McCoy walk after 2014. If San Francisco or Seattle drafts him, his value is pretty much nil. In dynasty, I think Sankey is a great buy, but it all comes down to his situation.

 

[Biabreakable]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

I couldn't really care less what he weighs. He plays like a tweener to me.

ETA: Grinder in the NCAA ≠ grinder in NFL.

What does playing like a tweener mean if you are not referencing his weight?

 

[werdnoynek]

Alike most players, it comes down to which situation he'll be placed into. Most pundits seem to think that Sankey, Tre Mason, and Carlos Hyde are this year's top RB prospects, so I'm expecting at least two of these players to come off the board by the end of the second round. I'm not a Hyde believer at all, but Sankey and Mason profile very similarly in terms of size, combine measurables, etc. Sankey caught more passes in college, so that may or may not give him a very slight edge.

In addition, Ian Rapoport reported that Mason needs wrist surgery and that may affect his draft stock. Mason is refuting that report, so it remains to be seen whether or not he needs surgery. Either way, NFL teams will know whether he needs surgery or not before they draft him. Mason's health may firmly entrench Sankey as the first runner off the board.

If the Titans draft Sankey in the second round, I think he immediately vaults up in the 5th-7th round in redraft. If the Eagles draft Sankey, they may keep him on ice and let McCoy walk after 2014. If San Francisco or Seattle drafts him, his value is pretty much nil. In dynasty, I think Sankey is a great buy, but it all comes down to his situation.

 

[DAG]

Part of the point, I think, is that these types of guys don't need to be elite to produce consistent numbers because of a combination of the prevalence of ppr scoring systems in FF and NFL trends toward integrating smaller/diverse RBs into more pass-heavy schemes (and moreover drafting them oftentimes specifically for that role). What makes Gio a top dynasty RB to me is that he combines top-notch ability in space with surprising power and leverage in short yardage. The Bengals seemed pretty comfortable leaving him in on some goal line packages last year. I don't recall if short yardage power was part of Gio's evaluation coming of out NC but I know that came as a bit of a surprise for me. He's not elite there, but for a back with his profile that's gravy.

I don't know if Sankey is on Gio's level or not but that's not determinative of his value to me (and I'll admit to needing to do more research on him). The type of back that Sankey is gets my attention in dynasty a lot more than larger backs who might get pigeon-holed by coordinators into the "power back" role. Obviously you'd love to have someone like Steve Jackson, Tomlinson, even Arian Foster, who have all-around games but it's not clear one of those guys is in this class or that the role these guys have occupied will be as prevalent in the league as long as current trends persist.

 

[mvereb]

Alike most players, it comes down to which situation he'll be placed into. Most pundits seem to think that Sankey, Tre Mason, and Carlos Hyde are this year's top RB prospects, so I'm expecting at least two of these players to come off the board by the end of the second round. I'm not a Hyde believer at all, but Sankey and Mason profile very similarly in terms of size, combine measurables, etc. Sankey caught more passes in college, so that may or may not give him a very slight edge.

In addition, Ian Rapoport reported that Mason needs wrist surgery and that may affect his draft stock. Mason is refuting that report, so it remains to be seen whether or not he needs surgery. Either way, NFL teams will know whether he needs surgery or not before they draft him. Mason's health may firmly entrench Sankey as the first runner off the board.

If the Titans draft Sankey in the second round, I think he immediately vaults up in the 5th-7th round in redraft. If the Eagles draft Sankey, they may keep him on ice and let McCoy walk after 2014. If San Francisco or Seattle drafts him, his value is pretty much nil. In dynasty, I think Sankey is a great buy, but it all comes down to his situation.

It's not crazy. There are rumors out of Philadelphia that Kelly isn't in love with McCoy. He'll be 27 heading into 2015 and the cap hit isn't huge if they let him go. Point being--the RB position is being devalued across the league and paying $12,000,000 for a RB is a bad allocation of resources.

 

[werdnoynek]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

I couldn't really care less what he weighs. He plays like a tweener to me.

ETA: Grinder in the NCAA ≠ grinder in NFL.

What does playing like a tweener mean if you are not referencing his weight?

I was referring to him being in between a grinder and a shifty/space guy. Nothing wrong with that, but I think in today's NFL, it's best to have a niche like that as a running back or you're going to lose carries to someone who fits one of those roles IMO.

I don't think he does anything overly well. I do think he can be successful but I don't think he'll ever be "the guy" for a NFL team for an extended period. If he goes to a great situation like the Titans as mvereb suggests above, he's sure to have some success this coming season baring any future trades or other backs being drafted by them. But I don't see him sustaining that success when a difference maker shows up on the same team.

 

[mvereb]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

I couldn't really care less what he weighs. He plays like a tweener to me.

ETA: Grinder in the NCAA ≠ grinder in NFL.

What does playing like a tweener mean if you are not referencing his weight?

I was referring to him being in between a grinder and a shifty/space guy. Nothing wrong with that, but I think in today's NFL, it's best to have a niche like that as a running back or you're going to lose carries to someone who fits one of those roles IMO.

I don't think he does anything overly well. I do think he can be successful but I don't think he'll ever be "the guy" for a NFL team for an extended period. If he goes to a great situation like the Titans as mvereb suggests above, he's sure to have some success this coming season baring any future trades or other backs being drafted by them. But I don't see him sustaining that success when a difference maker shows up on the same team.

See, we finally agree!

Adrian Peterson is making the highest base salary this season ($11.75). He's followed by Shady ($7.65), Forte ($5.95), Foster ($5.75), and Lynch ($5). The other 26 starting RBs are between $1-$4 million. There's no doubt that Shady is arguably the best RB in the league, but if there are already rumblings about Chip's indifference regarding McCoy coupled with a high cap number, you have to wonder if he'll look to draft another RB or two this year.

 

[Biabreakable]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

I couldn't really care less what he weighs. He plays like a tweener to me.

ETA: Grinder in the NCAA ≠ grinder in NFL.

What does playing like a tweener mean if you are not referencing his weight?

I was referring to him being in between a grinder and a shifty/space guy. Nothing wrong with that, but I think in today's NFL, it's best to have a niche like that as a running back or you're going to lose carries to someone who fits one of those roles IMO.

I don't think he does anything overly well. I do think he can be successful but I don't think he'll ever be "the guy" for a NFL team for an extended period. If he goes to a great situation like the Titans as mvereb suggests above, he's sure to have some success this coming season baring any future trades or other backs being drafted by them. But I don't see him sustaining that success when a difference maker shows up on the same team.

Now you seem to be arguing for a incomplete RB who excels as either a power Rb or a Rb who does his damage in space. Then based on this idea you are saying that Sankey can do neither instead of both. Because he does not stand out enough in either category?

Personally I am looking for a complete RB who can do both which I think Sankey qualifies as that. The tweener argument just does not make any sense to me.

Seastrunk seems more one dimensional to me than Sankey does. He is very good speed RB but what he seems to lack in the consistency as a grinder.

So if I understand you correctly you would prefer a niche RB who specializes in one thing (which will lead to that RB being in a time share) rather than a RB whos game is more well rounded?

 

[jurb26]

Yeah, I think people need to be careful about trying to fit all the prospects into these boxes. A lot of the same things being said about Sankey were said about Forte, Martin and others. People seem to penalize Sankey for not having a flash factor in a specific category that separates him from the pack. What is lost in this is that he is good or very good in every category and that IS what separates him.

I should add that I get where werdnoynek is coming from. Sankey's skill set is somewhat hard to put your finger on and that can make many people uncomfortable, thus downgrading him. I think evidence of this is how many people can't even agree with what type of system he's best suited for. Personally, I think he's best suited for a zone ststem. Waldman likes him more as a gap driven system. To me that speaks to his universal skill set. I do however think there is a difference between tweener from a style standpoint and tweener as it relates to talent.

 

[werdnoynek]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

I couldn't really care less what he weighs. He plays like a tweener to me.

ETA: Grinder in the NCAA ≠ grinder in NFL.

What does playing like a tweener mean if you are not referencing his weight?

I was referring to him being in between a grinder and a shifty/space guy. Nothing wrong with that, but I think in today's NFL, it's best to have a niche like that as a running back or you're going to lose carries to someone who fits one of those roles IMO.

I don't think he does anything overly well. I do think he can be successful but I don't think he'll ever be "the guy" for a NFL team for an extended period. If he goes to a great situation like the Titans as mvereb suggests above, he's sure to have some success this coming season baring any future trades or other backs being drafted by them. But I don't see him sustaining that success when a difference maker shows up on the same team.

Now you seem to be arguing for a incomplete RB who excels as either a power Rb or a Rb who does his damage in space. Then based on this idea you are saying that Sankey can do neither instead of both. Because he does not stand out enough in either category?

Personally I am looking for a complete RB who can do both which I think Sankey qualifies as that. The tweener argument just does not make any sense to me.

Seastrunk seems more one dimensional to me than Sankey does. He is very good speed RB but what he seems to lack in the consistency as a grinder.

So if I understand you correctly you would prefer a niche RB who specializes in one thing (which will lead to that RB being in a time share) rather than a RB whos game is more well rounded?

I guess it did come off that way. I was implying (poorly) that if you don't excel at any one thing you'll lose out to a niche back who can do the grinding or space role better. I was trying to say, over a guy like Sankey I'd rather take a niche back because I don't see him as special at any one thing and in the current RB landscape guys like him are going to lose out to the niche guys.

I'd take a complete back over all of them, but I don't really see a complete back (a this point in their careers) in this class.

 

[Biabreakable]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

I couldn't really care less what he weighs. He plays like a tweener to me.

ETA: Grinder in the NCAA ≠ grinder in NFL.

What does playing like a tweener mean if you are not referencing his weight?

I was referring to him being in between a grinder and a shifty/space guy. Nothing wrong with that, but I think in today's NFL, it's best to have a niche like that as a running back or you're going to lose carries to someone who fits one of those roles IMO.

I don't think he does anything overly well. I do think he can be successful but I don't think he'll ever be "the guy" for a NFL team for an extended period. If he goes to a great situation like the Titans as mvereb suggests above, he's sure to have some success this coming season baring any future trades or other backs being drafted by them. But I don't see him sustaining that success when a difference maker shows up on the same team.

Now you seem to be arguing for a incomplete RB who excels as either a power Rb or a Rb who does his damage in space. Then based on this idea you are saying that Sankey can do neither instead of both. Because he does not stand out enough in either category?

Personally I am looking for a complete RB who can do both which I think Sankey qualifies as that. The tweener argument just does not make any sense to me.

Seastrunk seems more one dimensional to me than Sankey does. He is very good speed RB but what he seems to lack in the consistency as a grinder.

So if I understand you correctly you would prefer a niche RB who specializes in one thing (which will lead to that RB being in a time share) rather than a RB whos game is more well rounded?

I guess it did come off that way. I was implying (poorly) that if you don't excel at any one thing you'll lose out to a niche back who can do the grinding or space role better. I was trying to say, over a guy like Sankey I'd rather take a niche back because I don't see him as special at any one thing and in the current RB landscape guys like him are going to lose out to the niche guys.

I'd take a complete back over all of them, but I don't really see a complete back (a this point in their careers) in this class.

Ok.

Who did you consider to be a complete RB in 2013 or another year recently and why? What characteristics led you to think that?

This is why we can look at the same player and see different things, because we are looking for different traits that we believe will lead to success in the NFL and therefore FF.

A big part of why I value a RB as a pass blocker and receiver (in addition to being a good runner) is because that leads me to believe the player will be used in more versatile ways and be on the field for more snaps. So RB who are lacking in pass protection (Mason maybe) or in short yardage situations are less likely to play 3 downs. If that player gives up any role (short yardage/3rd down) they will have less opportunity.

From what you are saying you seem to think Sankey is such a poor talent at RB that he would be beaten out for those roles by niche RB who excel in one of those areas and thus he gets little playing time at all.

Given the information I have about Sankey I do not see that happening.

Lets say Sankey goes to the Titans for example. Will Greene take everything but the 3rd down role? Because he is better between the tackles? Or is Sankey good enough between the tackles that they will play him over Shonn Greene on most downs because he also has big play ability and is a better receiving option than Greene is?

I consider Chris Johnson a bit of a niche player himself. Very good at breaking a long gain (perhaps one of the best at this in recent history) but lacking that sustaining positive yardage that keeps the chains moving. The Titans seem to have thought so too which is why the spelled him with Greene and Battle (the power aspect that Johnson is lacking).

Keeping the defense guessing is an important aspect to a successful running game. If teams opt to play niche players in tandem over a complete RB they make life more difficult for their offense and for those RB to be successful because the defense can then reasonably anticipate what the running back can and will do on any given play. A RB who can do well (although perhaps not as well in one area as a talent like Chris Johnson) in every aspect of what a team will ask a RB to do I think gets the nod over the niche players because of that versatility which will keep the defense guessing.

 

[werdnoynek]

werdnoynek I have heard EBFs arguments. I disagree. Your reiteration of the same points claiming Sankey is a tweener based off of some mythical BMI evaluation is not something I consider to be true at all.

I think Sankey is fully capable of being a grinder and a RB who excels in space. I have seen him do both at the college level. 10lbs or .05 seconds in the 40 is not something that puts him into this in between category where he is good at nothing. As detractors of Sankey keep saying.

I couldn't really care less what he weighs. He plays like a tweener to me.

ETA: Grinder in the NCAA ≠ grinder in NFL.

What does playing like a tweener mean if you are not referencing his weight?

I was referring to him being in between a grinder and a shifty/space guy. Nothing wrong with that, but I think in today's NFL, it's best to have a niche like that as a running back or you're going to lose carries to someone who fits one of those roles IMO.

I don't think he does anything overly well. I do think he can be successful but I don't think he'll ever be "the guy" for a NFL team for an extended period. If he goes to a great situation like the Titans as mvereb suggests above, he's sure to have some success this coming season baring any future trades or other backs being drafted by them. But I don't see him sustaining that success when a difference maker shows up on the same team.

Now you seem to be arguing for a incomplete RB who excels as either a power Rb or a Rb who does his damage in space. Then based on this idea you are saying that Sankey can do neither instead of both. Because he does not stand out enough in either category?

Personally I am looking for a complete RB who can do both which I think Sankey qualifies as that. The tweener argument just does not make any sense to me.

Seastrunk seems more one dimensional to me than Sankey does. He is very good speed RB but what he seems to lack in the consistency as a grinder.

So if I understand you correctly you would prefer a niche RB who specializes in one thing (which will lead to that RB being in a time share) rather than a RB whos game is more well rounded?

I guess it did come off that way. I was implying (poorly) that if you don't excel at any one thing you'll lose out to a niche back who can do the grinding or space role better. I was trying to say, over a guy like Sankey I'd rather take a niche back because I don't see him as special at any one thing and in the current RB landscape guys like him are going to lose out to the niche guys.I'd take a complete back over all of them, but I don't really see a complete back (a this point in their careers) in this class.

Ok.

Who did you consider to be a complete RB in 2013 or another year recently and why? What characteristics led you to think that?

This is why we can look at the same player and see different things, because we are looking for different traits that we believe will lead to success in the NFL and therefore FF.

A big part of why I value a RB as a pass blocker and receiver (in addition to being a good runner) is because that leads me to believe the player will be used in more versatile ways and be on the field for more snaps. So RB who are lacking in pass protection (Mason maybe) or in short yardage situations are less likely to play 3 downs. If that player gives up any role (short yardage/3rd down) they will have less opportunity.

From what you are saying you seem to think Sankey is such a poor talent at RB that he would be beaten out for those roles by niche RB who excel in one of those areas and thus he gets little playing time at all.

Given the information I have about Sankey I do not see that happening.

Lets say Sankey goes to the Titans for example. Will Greene take everything but the 3rd down role? Because he is better between the tackles? Or is Sankey good enough between the tackles that they will play him over Shonn Greene on most downs because he also has big play ability and is a better receiving option than Greene is?

I consider Chris Johnson a bit of a niche player himself. Very good at breaking a long gain (perhaps one of the best at this in recent history) but lacking that sustaining positive yardage that keeps the chains moving. The Titans seem to have thought so too which is why the spelled him with Greene and Battle (the power aspect that Johnson is lacking).

Keeping the defense guessing is an important aspect to a successful running game. If teams opt to play niche players in tandem over a complete RB they make life more difficult for their offense and for those RB to be successful because the defense can then reasonably anticipate what the running back can and will do on any given play. A RB who can do well (although perhaps not as well in one area as a talent like Chris Johnson) in every aspect of what a team will ask a RB to do I think gets the nod over the niche players because of that versatility which will keep the defense guessing.

I think there's been talk of the Titans using McCluster at RB for the Woodhead role of Wisenhunt's offense. If Sankey is drafted by the Titans I could see him an early down role for them, but question if he'd get the goal line carries or short yardage work with Greene there. Poor is a strong word. He's a decent RB talent and could do well with an opportunity, but I question him being this bell cow all around back some are making him out to be. I also question him being a difference maker. People comparing him to Martin or Rice are only looking at measurables and size IMO. Ray Rice and Doug Martin weren't stiff like Sankey appears to be to me. His shoulders seem to be strapped to his hips or something and when he cuts or turns is seems very rigid and exaggerated. I think they were much smoother runners in space and that's a difference making ability for guys at their size. I agree he can do it all and is versatile but he lacks that special something in my eyes. That special something that keeps you from being replaced by superior backs.

I don't think we're really getting anywhere at this point. I'm just not a fan.

ETA: Neglected your first question. Lacy was the most complete back last year and has it all IMO. Power, agility, receiving ability, and pass protection. I think Gio is more of a complete back than Sankey as well. He has deceiving power to go with the quicks. We know of his receiving ability. For me, they both do everything Sankey does, better.

 

[ShaHBucks]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

 

[Biabreakable]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

What evidence do you have to suggest the NFL is going bigger now as compared to 2009?

From my perspective the NFL has always seemed to prefer bigger players but those players tend to have shorter careers and do not sustain their performance as long as the smaller RB do.

To say that a smaller RB can only run outside is not correct either. Too many examples of this not being the case.

 

[Biabreakable]

I don't think we're really getting anywhere at this point. I'm just not a fan.

There we agree. None of your comments have been backed up by anything that is tangible.

 

[werdnoynek]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

I agree with where your going with this. I don't think that that 40 time means all that much though. I think their agility and open field quicks/shifting need to make up for the lack of size rather than just straight line speed. Sankey just doesn't have the shiftiness to make up for what he lacks IMO.

 

[Xue]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

What evidence do you have to suggest the NFL is going bigger now as compared to 2009?

From my perspective the NFL has always seemed to prefer bigger players but those players tend to have shorter careers and do not sustain their performance as long as the smaller RB do.

To say that a smaller RB can only run outside is not correct either. Too many examples of this not being the case.

RBs aren't getting bigger, they're getting shorter: http://www.footballperspective.com/running-backs-getting-shorter-and-heavier/

 

[werdnoynek]

I don't think we're really getting anywhere at this point. I'm just not a fan.

There we agree. None of your comments have been backed up by anything that is tangible.

I cant reach through the interwebs and put something in front of you that you can touch and feel. My apologies.

Seriously though, I cant really quantify Sankey' lack of talent. We all know the numbers and measurables. I know what I see and I'm attempting to explain it. I'm excited to see what the Professionals think of him and then to see what he can actually do in the NFL . I'll eat my crow if it comes to it.

 

[ShaHBucks]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

What evidence do you have to suggest the NFL is going bigger now as compared to 2009?

From my perspective the NFL has always seemed to prefer bigger players but those players tend to have shorter careers and do not sustain their performance as long as the smaller RB do.

To say that a smaller RB can only run outside is not correct either. Too many examples of this not being the case.

Look it up. The training and nutrition programs player are on from HS to the pros get better over time with science. Just following recent trends, bigger backs or 4.3ish runners are what works right now. Give me "too many" examples of recently drafted small RBs who are workhorses, taking goal-line carries and pushing piles today.

 

[ShaHBucks]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

I agree with where your going with this. I don't think that that 40 time means all that much though. I think their agility and open field quicks/shifting need to make up for the lack of size rather than just straight line speed. Sankey just doesn't have the shiftiness to make up for what he lacks IMO.

Dam, I consider that one of his best assets.

 

[werdnoynek]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

I agree with where your going with this. I don't think that that 40 time means all that much though. I think their agility and open field quicks/shifting need to make up for the lack of size rather than just straight line speed. Sankey just doesn't have the shiftiness to make up for what he lacks IMO.

Dam, I consider that one of his best assets.

Looks very stiff in game. I think we've discussed thus before, shuttle score be damned!

 

[Xue]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

I agree with where your going with this. I don't think that that 40 time means all that much though. I think their agility and open field quicks/shifting need to make up for the lack of size rather than just straight line speed. Sankey just doesn't have the shiftiness to make up for what he lacks IMO.

Dam, I consider that one of his best assets.

Looks very stiff in game. I think we've discussed thus before, shuttle score be damned!

I don't know how you can call a guy stiff when he can get into this position:

http://lifesyourcupfb.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/sankey-ankle-flexion-1.jpg

http://lifesyourcupfb.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/sankey-ankle-flexion-2.jpg

I'd say the 3-cone is more indicative of whether or not a player is "stiff".

 

[ShaHBucks]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

I agree with where your going with this. I don't think that that 40 time means all that much though. I think their agility and open field quicks/shifting need to make up for the lack of size rather than just straight line speed. Sankey just doesn't have the shiftiness to make up for what he lacks IMO.

Dam, I consider that one of his best assets.

Looks very stiff in game. I think we've discussed thus before, shuttle score be damned!

I don't know how you can call a guy stiff when he can get into this position:

http://lifesyourcupfb.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/sankey-ankle-flexion-1.jpg

http://lifesyourcupfb.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/sankey-ankle-flexion-2.jpg

I'd say the 3-cone is more indicative of whether or not a player is "stiff".

That's some crazy ankle flexibility there

 

[werdnoynek]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

I agree with where your going with this. I don't think that that 40 time means all that much though. I think their agility and open field quicks/shifting need to make up for the lack of size rather than just straight line speed. Sankey just doesn't have the shiftiness to make up for what he lacks IMO.

Dam, I consider that one of his best assets.

Looks very stiff in game. I think we've discussed thus before, shuttle score be damned!

I don't know how you can call a guy stiff when he can get into this position:

http://lifesyourcupfb.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/sankey-ankle-flexion-1.jpg

http://lifesyourcupfb.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/sankey-ankle-flexion-2.jpg

I'd say the 3-cone is more indicative of whether or not a player is "stiff".

Look at his upper body when he runs while changing direction or juking, it doesn't move. He doesn't really fake many people out while juking. He's a stiff runner IMO. I don't care if he can touch the ground with his knee while running.ETA: forgot the n't

 

[Biabreakable]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

What evidence do you have to suggest the NFL is going bigger now as compared to 2009?

From my perspective the NFL has always seemed to prefer bigger players but those players tend to have shorter careers and do not sustain their performance as long as the smaller RB do.

To say that a smaller RB can only run outside is not correct either. Too many examples of this not being the case.

Look it up. The training and nutrition programs player are on from HS to the pros get better over time with science. Just following recent trends, bigger backs or 4.3ish runners are what works right now.Give me "too many" examples of recently drafted small RBs who are workhorses, taking goal-line carries and pushing piles today.

I have looked it up. Every season I look it up. Your assessment is incorrect.

You made the statement. It is not on me to prove it wrong but on you to back your statement up with some facts. Something you repeatedly seem unwilling to do. That bothers me.

Draft probabilities by position

Some interesting excerpts from this article-

• Smaller Running Backs (210 pound or less)

• Larger Running Backs (over 210 pounds)

I am not sure why this cut off is at 210lbs. I am noticing the same thing from similar discussion with EBF.

What is so special about 210bs?

Selections 1-13

• Average % of five-year starters: 71.3%

• Among playing positions with at least 10 players drafted with these selections during the study period, the probability of drafting a five-year starter ranged from 60% to 95%

• Least risky: Offensive linemen (95%, or 20 of the 21 offensive linemen selected from 1994 through 2008 became five-year starters)

• Most risky: Large running backs (60.0% five-year starters), but quarterbacks (64.0%) and wide receivers (61.5%) were close.

Selections 14-24

• Average % of five-year starters: 63%

• Among playing positions with at least 10 players drafted with these selections during the study period, the probability of drafting a five-year starter ranged from 36% to 71%

• Quarterbacks, small running backs, tight ends, safeties and inside linebackers had too few selections to consider as part of the discussion

• Least risky: Offensive lineman with 71% of draftees becoming five-year starters

• Most risky: Large running backs with 36% of draftees becoming five-year starters

This is why I tend to downgrade larger RB because they carry more risk of shortened careers than smaller quicker RB.

What I didn't know is that small RB drafted after pick 24 carry just as much if not more risk than the big RB.

Selections 25-46

• Most risky: Small running backs (16.7%), large running backs (23.5%)

Selections 47-73

• Most risky: Quarterbacks (8%), small and large running backs (combined percentage of 11%)

Small and Big RB are lumped together here as such a small percentage of either have 5 year careers.

Observations:

• Not many small running backs are taken with early selections

• There is a low likelihood of grabbing a starter at any point in the draft but players in this group often return kicks

• The probability of drafting a five-year starter is lower than the average for each draft choice range.

Observations:

• Drafting running backs is a risky propositions and the percentage of five-year starters is below the average in every data choice range

• Only two of the 92 large running backs selected after the 114th pick ended up as a five-year starter

• The probability of having a five-year career is considerably lower for large running backs than the average of all positions.

Jonathan Bales

Exploring Running Back Size

Wednesday, April 02, 2014

http://www.rotoworld...-back-size?pg=1

Jonathan Bales is the author of the Fantasy Football for Smart People book series. He recently launched RotoAcademy - a fantasy football training school.

I was having a conversation with my dad the other day and I asked him to name the top four wide receivers in football with whom he’d want to start a team. He said Calvin Johnson, Josh Gordon, Dez Bryant and A.J. Green. I agree with three, subbing in Demaryius Thomas for Green (although it’s close).

Then I asked him to name the top four running backs with whom he’d start a team. LeSean McCoy was an immediate choice. He contemplated Jamaal Charles and Adrian Peterson, but in running back years, they’re basically dead. Matt Forte was on his list, as was Marshawn Lynch - Marshawn Lynch! - and Le’Veon Bell.

If that list sounds ridiculous to you, it’s because 1) it kind of is and 2) it’s really, really hard to figure out which running backs are the best ones. We can immediately identify the top wide receivers in the NFL, but that task is exponentially more difficult for running backs. If we’re incorporating age into our assessment - which we should since it matters in both real life and fantasy - who the hell are our starting four? I’d likely still throw Charles and perhaps AP in there with McCoy, but I seriously have no idea who is the fourth-best back in the NFL.

In short, we know that Julio Jones and Dez Bryant and those studs are better than second-tier receivers like Jordy Nelson and Eric Decker, who are in turn better than guys like Brandon LaFell. But outside of a couple obvious talents at running back, can we really know that the consensus No. 25 running back is any worse than the No. 5 player at the position? How good is a player like C.J. Spiller? I legitimately considered putting him in my top four, but I have a feeling that most people might not have him in their top 15 or 20.

When it comes down to it, running backs are just so dependent on their teammates for success that it’s really difficult to isolate their play and figure out how good they are. They’re difficult to project out of college and their NFL stats are only loosely tied to their actual talent.

That’s one reason I’ve been going against the grain in advocating a late-round running back strategy as of late, but it’s not like we can just draft only rookies at the position (maybe). Running back is still very important in the fantasy realm, so what can we make of the position?

Running backs are always going to be dependent on heavy usage for substantial production, but we still need to figure out some way to predict which ones are going to be useful when they get opportunities.

Running Back Size

Heading into this analysis, my hypothesis was that shorter, heavier running backs would have more success than taller, lighter ones. I was really interested in the height data because I’ve had a suspicion that shorter backs are generally better; they’re usually more agile, quicker and have a low center-of-gravity which is crucial at the position.

Related to both height and weight is body-mass index (BMI). Using BMI to judge overall health is absolutely asinine - pretty much every NFL player falls into the ‘obese’ category - but it’s still a good measure of how much bulk a running back possesses; a 5’10” back who weighs 210 pounds is bulkier and has a higher BMI than a 5’10” back who weighs only 190 pounds. The taller a player, the more difficult it is for him to have a high BMI. So I’m really looking to test three things - height, weight and body mass - and how they affect NFL performance.

The first thing I did was test the correlation between those three traits and a trio of stats - carries, yards-per-carry and touchdowns - for all backs since 2000 with at least 300 yards rushing. Here are those r-values. (see link for graphs)

The initial numbers suggest that height doesn’t affect NFL performance all that much for running backs (more on that later). Taller backs get a few more carries than shorter ones, they have a few more touchdowns, but they’re generally a bit less efficient in terms of YPC.

Meanwhile, take a look at weight and BMI. Neither affects workload very much - meaning we’ve already determined we can’t use running back size to predict rushing attempts - and they’re both weakly correlated to touchdowns. We’d expect bigger, heavier backs to score more touchdowns just because they see more goal line attempts, though.

But take a look at the effect of weight/BMI on rushing efficiency. They’re pretty strongly negatively correlated, meaning as weight increases, rushing efficiency decreases. This was at first a surprise to me because we wouldn’t expect heavier backs to be worse.

I overlooked an important fact, though; generally, heavier backs are slower than light ones, and speed is incredibly important to running backs. I’ve shown that the 40-yard dash matters more for backs than for any other position. Here’s a refresher that breaks down running back approximate value according to combine 40 times.

I value speed in running backs even more than other stat geeks; if a running back doesn’t run sub-4.55 (regardless of his weight), there’s very little chance I’ll draft him. If he’s very light, his little frame better be accompanied by blazing speed.

The fact that heavy running backs are much worse than lighter ones isn’t surprising when you consider the differences in speed. So does extra weight hurt a running back? No, with two caveats: 1) he isn’t just eating Wendy’s and the “extra” weight is lean muscle and 2) his speed remains unchanged. I’ll take a 220-pound back with 4.45 speed over a 200-pound back with the same speed all day. Weight is good, it’s just not as important as straight-line speed.

Now, let’s get back to height…

Height and Running Back Success

The correlations suggested that, as a general rule-of-thumb, taller might not be worse for backs, but there’s another way to analyze the data - sorting it into buckets. I like to do this because it helps see how performance changes at certain thresholds. And when we do that with height, we see a different story for running backs.

I sorted all of the data into quantiles for height, weight and BMI.

We see a steady decline in YPC with weight; the lightest quarter of all backs has been the most efficient, followed by the 26th-50th percentile, and so on. The BMI effect is similar, with a very rapid decline after the bottom quarter.

Very quickly, I want to mention that there’s probably a little bit of a selection bias here with lighter backs getting a higher quality of carries. When a running back gets a carry on third-and-10, he usually gains a decent number of yards, and he’s also usually a fairly light third-down back. However, such carries are pretty uncommon and the results are very strong, suggesting that the real culprit is simply heavy backs being slower.

I’m going to bold this sentence and say it again: the best running backs are fast.

Now, look at height. Remember that the correlations showed that height might not matter too much for running backs, but what we really see is that the bottom 75 percent of running backs in terms of height perform right around the same in terms of efficiency. Meanwhile, the top 25 percent - the tallest quarter of running backs - have rushed for fewer than 4.0 YPC since 2000. That’s horrific.

To me, this is clear evidence that height doesn’t matter all that much for running backs … to a point. And that point is right around 73 inches, or 6’1”.

Now let me just address the criticism sure to come to everyone’s minds: BUT ADRIAN PETERSON IS 6’1”! Yes, that’s true. As is the fact that Arian Foster ran a 4.68 in the 40-yard dash, Jerry Rice was also quite slow, Warren Sapp dominated inside despite shorter-than-average arms and lots of other cases of players becoming exceptions to the rule.

My goal isn’t to get every prediction correct, but just to tilt the odds a little bit. And the numbers suggest that, as a general rule-of-thumb, we should prefer shorter backs over those who stand well above 6’0”. That doesn’t mean we need to avoid every tall running back. In the case of Adrian Peterson, it’s kind of difficult to hate a 217-pound back with 4.40 speed. But if another back were similar to Peterson - 217 pounds with 4.40 speed and a comparable skill set - but he checked in at 5’10”, we’d be smart to favor the shorter back.

All other things equal, we should seek running backs 6’0” or shorter.

 

[ShaHBucks]

What makes you think I care if something bothers you? All of your debates go "I'm right, you're wrong" so I leave it at that.

 

[buck naked]

Earlier in the year EBF made the comment that we needed to see what he had "under the hood" before he could sign off on him. He has kind of backed off of that statement and still doesn't like Sankey even after he killed the combine.

I don't think his ceiling is on par with the truly elite talents (i.e. Peterson, Lynch, McCoy, Charles, Mathews, Spiller, Bush, Forte, Stewart, DeAngelo, Gore, MJD, Martin). He's a mediocre NFL talent.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=459397&view=&hl=&fromsearch=1Now forte is elite and ebf said it!!! Wow how times have changed from the biggest forte hater.

I everyone has strengths and ebf is good at writing and numbers. Which is why he's high on jstew, Michael, mendenhall, dougie types at rb. Some times they pan out and other times they don't.

However he has weaknesses as well which include the good at a lot but not great at one thing prospects like forte and Sankey. Will Sankey pan out? Maybe, but ebf has an obvious bias against these types of players.

So he has struck out big-time before. Doesn't surprise me...

Which makes him like, oh, every single other person who prognosticates on NFL talent.

You have to read EBF the same as every other person who has an opinion on this board. No need to be critical.

 

[EBF]

I could just as easily say that I was right about guys like Darren McFadden, Beanie Wells, Johnathan Franklin, Lorenzo Booker, Isaiah Pead, and Ronnie Hillman all along. All guys that I never drafted/avoided like the plague. It's pretty useless to pull out one hit or miss without providing the broader context. I'm going to go out on a small limb and say that I know more about my track record, methods, and tendencies than random posters.

If people think I only like workout warriors at RB, that's not really the case. I always liked Ray Rice a lot. I was definitely intrigued by LeSean McCoy.

I don't hate Sankey, but I don't think he looks like a great prospect either. That's what I'd say based solely on the eyeball test. The numbers merely help me get a better idea of what exactly he is and how he might function in the NFL.

 

[Touchdown There]

Franklin? The 4th round rookie in GB? I own Eddie Lacy and let me tell you, in week 3, when Lacy was given a cheap shot concussion, Franklin looked good. He ran like crazy on a solid defense and that was pretty much his body of work for the year. Not sure why he is on your list.

 

[Xue]

Hopefully I can be a voice of reason here. I kind of agree with everbody to some extent. 5'8-10, 200 +/- pounds used to be the normal for RBs awhile ago. In 2009 Sankey would have the profile of a 1st round pick, like Donald Brown. That isn't the case today because these small/speed backs are a dime a dozen and flop more often. The NFL is getting bigger. The guys that are 20-40+ pounds who run 4.5 are in demand because a lot of the smaller backs get hurt too often and can only run off tackle. Therefore, they get drafted as role players of get buried behind bigger backs like Jonathan Franklin was last year. Either that or you're a role player like Gio.

Sankey might be different though. He gets an upgrade for his strength. 26 reps on the bench for someone his size is impressive. There isn't too many backs (215 pounds or less) that has his speed-agility-strength combo. That doesn't mean he's guaranteed success. Guys his size are not taking a ton of carries because they can't move piles. Guys his size are not dominating the NFL right now unless they run in the 4.2-3 40x. LeSean McCoy is the outliner. We have to see where he lands to dictate who he'll be statistically. My only fear is he yeilds goal line touches to someone and isn't really a workhorse.

I agree with where your going with this. I don't think that that 40 time means all that much though. I think their agility and open field quicks/shifting need to make up for the lack of size rather than just straight line speed. Sankey just doesn't have the shiftiness to make up for what he lacks IMO.

Dam, I consider that one of his best assets.

Looks very stiff in game. I think we've discussed thus before, shuttle score be damned!

I don't know how you can call a guy stiff when he can get into this position:

http://lifesyourcupfb.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/sankey-ankle-flexion-1.jpg

http://lifesyourcupfb.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/sankey-ankle-flexion-2.jpg

I'd say the 3-cone is more indicative of whether or not a player is "stiff".

Look at his upper body when he runs while changing direction or juking, it doesn't move. He doesn't really fake many people out while juking. He's a stiff runner IMO. I don't care if he can touch the ground with his knee while running.ETA: forgot the n't

He doesn't need to "adjust" his upper body much when changing directions because he is so flexible in the hips and ankles. This is why he tends to keep his shoulders square to the LOS when he's running.

 

[Milkman]

If he goes somewhere like Tennessee in the second. He'll be considered at #2 overall in PPR drafts. Especially with all the talent at WR. Go Sankey @ #2 and whoever is left at wr in the second like Matthews or Robinson.

Sometimes people mistake efficient movements with slow or not explosive. Imo the same mistake is being made with Jordan Matthews. Sankey's combine proved he's a great athlete. It's funny Matthews did too.

 

[werdnoynek]

If he goes somewhere like Tennessee in the second. He'll be considered at #2 overall in PPR drafts. Especially with all the talent at WR. Go Sankey @ #2 and whoever is left at wr in the second like Matthews or Robinson.

Sometimes people mistake efficient movements with slow or not explosive. Imo the same mistake is being made with Jordan Matthews. Sankey's combine proved his a great athlete. It's funny Matthews did too.

You're right. They're great athletes. Good at their positions too... But not great, IMO.