Day 3? Let's look at that. Because you're wrong. Since there's a ton of backfield changes coming, let's use a 2020 depth chart for the sake of the argument... https://www.cbssports.com/fantasy/football/depth-chart/RB/ I count 6. James Robinson Austin Ekeler Myles Gaskin Aaron Jones Chris Carson Raheem Mostert That's six guys out of 32 teams. And Gaskin is no star. 93 RBs were drafted after the 3rd round since Raheem Mostert entered the league in 2015 (and he wasn't even drafted, heck, 3/6 weren't), and this is our success rate. That's not a full league of late guys by any means. That's why I'd be pretty nervous about counting on someone in day 3 to be a meaningful complement to our QB.
You and I definitely view our window of opportunity differently, I guess. That has an effect on how we discuss this. You're planning 5 years out and the team is organizing to win now. Kyler's going to start talking contract extension at the end of this season, Keim and Kliff are in a tenuous situation where they need to win now or never. I personally would prioritize RB over edge, maybe even WR.
I just don’t see how you can prioritize the least valuable position in football over a premium position, probably the most premium non-QB position in football. Whether it’s a 1 year window or 10 year window. Drafting a ILB then a RB in the first round in back-to-back drafts is asinine.
Can we talk about "least valuable?" Because, I'd love to know your metric. Is this purely about career longevity? The RB touches the ball more often than any player on the field but the center and QB.
So if you draft a Luke Keuchley (sp?) and an Emmit Smith in back-to-back drafts, that would be asinine? Asinine is making absolute statements about a position (save for K and P) while disregarding skill level. Here's a good example for you: the 2007 draft. Would you have rather had Adrian Peterson or Levi Brown? We regretted that mistake for a looooong time.
A player that is not dependent on needing to be a 1st rounder to heavily contribute for its team’s success. It doesn’t matter if the RB touches the ball after the QB & C if the C is getting drove all the way back the second the snap starts. And yes, it also factors longevity. Look at all the teams that drafted RBs in the first round recently. Jaguars with Fournette(not on team anymore) Rams with Gurley(not on team anymore. Had a good 2 year run, but look at that, 2 year run. Giants with Barkley(constantly dinged up. Imagine if they would’ve drafted Josh Allen instead?) Panthers with CMC(was fantastic a year ago, but was dinged up most of last year after getting that extension. Not good) Cowboys with Zeke(Great a couple years ago, but has starting to fall off & just look overall lazy. His extension hasn’t started yet which is scary! Imagine if they would’ve drafted Jalen Ramsey instead) Then you look at the very top RBs of the game like Nick Chubb, Alvin Kamara, Derrick Henry, Dalvin Cook....none of these guys were first rounders, but outside of Dalvin, all of these dudes gave a very good-to-elite OLine. We don’t have that! There’s a reason the NFL is starting to shift away from drafting RBs high. We might not even see a RB drafted in the top 15-20 for a long, long time.
Bringing up a guy that played in a totally different era 30+ years is rather irrelevant to today’s era. For that era, I’ll be happy with Emmitt, sure. Funny that you bring up Kuechly though. Him & Chandler Jones were in the same draft class. Both have had great careers. Guess who’s still playing though? The more valuable position. The position with more longevity. AP, but also, different era. Basically, give me the good EDGE/CB/OT over the great RB in today’s era.
I don't have a clue how we are going to fill the RB position and Edmonds to me is clearly an excellent change of pace back but not a extended starter. I also am aware that this offense only thrives when the rushing game is doing well... running back is more important than some people think
This is a false equivalence though... you're saying you're pretty uncomfortable taking an RB anywhere in this draft, and then you go on to point out guys drafted in the top 10, which isn't where we'll be drafting. There's a canyon between "draft an RB in the top 10 and don't upgrade the OL," and "let's get an RB in the first three rounds to bolster a pretty weak looking room."
It seemed like you were okay with drafting a RB in the 1st round, so I replied to that. I don’t want to draft a RB in the first 3 rounds for this year, at least, due to the amount of more valuable spots we need upgrading.
I'm not going to throw a tantrum if we take an RB in round 1, no. There's a lot that can go on in free agency in a few days to change how I'm going to feel about it, but I don't want to reach for the 4th best CB or 4th best WR instead of an elite RB, even if that only lasts us 5-6 years.
Well sure if you want to count only defacto starters and not guys who have shown they are starting calibre running backs in multi back schemes. Nyheim Hines Philip Lindsay Tony Pollard Tariq Cohen Jamaal Williams Wayne Gallman Marlon Mack Jordan Howard Tevin Coleman Mike Davis Jay Ajayi Jerrick McKinnon Etc etc I don't think the Cards are looking for a bell cow back again. I think they learned that lesson. And there's no super star elite running back in this class IMO. I think they take a cheap vet like Duke Johnson or Tevin Coleman and maybe add a lower round project.
Hopefully Keim doesn’t share these same thoughts. The 4th best CB could still be a very good CB so yea, easily going with that over an elite RB.
LOL we'd be THRILLED with a young Emmitt Smith or Adrian Peterson in THIS era. Also, the question isn't whether you'd have Chandler Jones or Luke Keuchley; it's whether Luke Keuechley is worth a 1st-round pick. The answer is a resounding YES. Same with the great RBs. If I KNEW both a RB and a pass rusher would be great, sure, I'd go with the pass rusher. Doesn't preclude taking a different position, though.
