Draft Watch: Running Backs

Dedicated to College Football and Draft discussion.
post

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby beardmcdoug » Thu Mar 29, 2018 12:06 pm

ok i've seen enough of penny. MWC guy who comes in to lead FBS in rushing THE NEXT YEAR after friggin Donnel Pumphrey leads the FBS in rushing has snake oil written all over it. he looks like a pretty generic runner playing against some HOT GARBAGE defensive guys. I mean he literally runs around - doesn't even juke - a flat footed MLB, who just stood there frozen, in about a 5 yard window, and goes on to score a 70 yd TD... that same situation he would have been speared by an NFL linebacker for 2 yard gain. I'm hesitant about this one... and I hope to god Licht and co are doing their due diligence and exploring other options... but as RBF has said, he seems to be the target right now... which would be really disappointing. Hell I'd rather take a flier on Bo Scarborough in the 4th or 5th instead of Penny in the second
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 2654
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 304 times
Been thanked: 197 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby real bucs fan » Thu Mar 29, 2018 12:08 pm

beardmcdoug wrote:
real bucs fan wrote:Assuming Barkley doesn't fall to 7, I think Rashaad Penny in Round 2 is the pick. Of all the round 2 type RBs, he's the only one we've met with.


Yeah I agree with this... time to go watch some Penny tape - haven't watched any but people keep talking about him

He's impressive. Watch his Senior Bowl tape, that's where he broke out as a prospect- and it's where Kareem Hunt broke out last year too. Both guys had quality of competition questions, and both guys answered those questions at the Senior Bowl where they were dominant.



ETA My bad, I thought those were his full highlights, can't find the tape I was looking for. But I watched it live and he opened my eyes the same way Hunt did last year. Hunt was more refined, but Penny is more explosive.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7745
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Doctor » Thu Mar 29, 2018 3:26 pm

Cheb wrote:
Doctor wrote:You mean a pair of gems in a large group of duds who can only be identified in hindsight and we've failed to do repeatedly selecting Jeremy McNichols, Danny Vitale, Joey Iosefa, Charles Sims, Mike James, Michael Smith, Allen Bradford... is that what you mean?


One fullback, one h-back. Charles Sims was drafted in the third round, which makes him a Day Two player in today's draft. So before you even start, half your list is crap. Everyone else was a sixth or seventh rounder, except McNichols, who was a fifth.

The issue is not spending a fourth or fifth round selection on a running back. The problem is selecting the wrong guy.

There's plenty of good runners this year. I agree with you that adding a top guy in the top two rounds makes sense, but writing off drafting an position after only two rounds is the height of stupidity.

Then you aren't understanding what I'm saying.

I wanted Cook last year in the first and if it wasn't for Howard being there I'm pretty confident that OBP would have selected him there. We didn't. I'm okay that we didn't because I really like the Howard pick and no one expected him to be there. Likewise, if this draft falls in a way that there are better players on the board and we go in that direction, I'm fine with that. I'm a total BPA guy. What I'm fighting against is the stupid "Meh, we can wait until Day 3 for a RB" argument. Like it's okay to pass on the BPA because he's a RB and there's plenty of RBs. No. Or the "studs are found in the late rounds all the time" as if that's even a valid argument.

You're right, it's about selecting the right player which is statistically less likely further down the draft you go. That's been more than proven. There's a reason players are selected in the 2nd and players in the 5th. Now while a player in the second still has a 60% bust rate, it's far lower than the 5th 90% rate. So yeah, the 5th will still produce plenty of great players (10%) who will obviously be way better than the busts in the second (60%), but the reality remains that finding and landing those players becomes less likely the further you go back. I'd much rather take my 40/60 odds with a player like Sony Michel in round 2 than my 10/90 odds with Bo Scarbrough in round 5.
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 209 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Phantom Phenom » Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:44 am

what about Damien Harris from Alabama?
User avatar
Phantom Phenom
 
Posts: 4486
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:48 pm
Has thanked: 42 times
Been thanked: 45 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Mountaineer Buc » Tue Apr 03, 2018 8:45 am

Phantom Phenom wrote:what about Damien Harris from Alabama?

He'll be a top RB prospect next year. He's staying at Bama.
Image
User avatar
Mountaineer Buc
 
Posts: 12007
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 1:15 pm
Location: Crestucky
Has thanked: 123 times
Been thanked: 592 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby mdb1958 » Tue Apr 03, 2018 4:20 pm

beardmcdoug wrote:
mdb1958 wrote:I'd like to talk about this rugby player, Jordan Mailata is 6'8" 345 and man can that big sucker run. He just doesnt stop churning those legs. This got me to thinking that while he is learning a position we could actually start a trend with him and incorporate a little rugby into the NFL. We have already started a trend in the NFL where offensive linemen push the pile towards the end of the play. That is exactly how this guy could be used.

If he was to make it to the 2nd level, this guy would punish defenses.


kids got fuckin terrible vision and doesn't know how to lower a shoulder. would bomb as an RB

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap3000000920697/Jordan-Mailata-rugby-highlights



http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0a ... al-pro-day
mdb1958
 
Posts: 8908
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby DreadNaught » Tue Apr 03, 2018 4:29 pm

mdb1958 wrote:
beardmcdoug wrote:
kids got fuckin terrible vision and doesn't know how to lower a shoulder. would bomb as an RB

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap3000000920697/Jordan-Mailata-rugby-highlights



http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0a ... al-pro-day


The Godfather Gil Brandt mentioned Mailata last week and I'm intrigued. But this isn't the right thread as he's not playing RB in the NFL.

His size and athleticism are eye-popping and some team will take a chance on him day 3. Never playing any organized (American) Football means he's got alot of development ahead if he wants to play in the NFL.

I'd spend a 6th on him and let him develop for a couple years behind Demar. He has some ideal Offensive Tackle or Defensive Tackle type of measurables.
Image
User avatar
DreadNaught
 
Posts: 11693
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 9:18 am
Has thanked: 479 times
Been thanked: 502 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby mdb1958 » Wed Apr 04, 2018 7:26 am

3rd and 2, could he be stopped? What if it was play-action and he just stayed in to block for Winston. I think a trend could be started of having a huge back problem is I dont think the NFL wants it. There would be to many bodies getting carted off. Linebackers would be giving self concussions.

But what ev, this guy will get you ten yards in two or three carries - till I'd see different.
mdb1958
 
Posts: 8908
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby mdb1958 » Wed Apr 04, 2018 7:29 am

BMD he dont need to lower his shoulder or even open his eyes for that matter.
mdb1958
 
Posts: 8908
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Deuce » Wed Apr 04, 2018 7:45 am

mdb1958 wrote:3rd and 2, could he be stopped? What if it was play-action and he just stayed in to block for Winston. I think a trend could be started of having a huge back problem is I dont think the NFL wants it. There would be to many bodies getting carted off. Linebackers would be giving self concussions.

But what ev, this guy will get you ten yards in two or three carries - till I'd see different.


Why would you want him when you could have a back that can block AND scamper for a few yards AND swing out and catch a pass? DeMarco Murray is better at all of those things than this guy.

There's a reason teams aren't doing this and it's not because the NFL doesn't want it. It's because he's too big, too slow, and doesn't know how to run like a RB. This guy's legs would be destroyed in his first game. There's absolutely no reason to put him at RB when there are plenty of capable RBs in this draft.
User avatar
Deuce
 
Posts: 1095
Joined: Fri Jan 16, 2015 7:23 pm
Has thanked: 39 times
Been thanked: 30 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby MJW » Wed Apr 04, 2018 9:19 am

beardmcdoug wrote:ok i've seen enough of penny. MWC guy who comes in to lead FBS in rushing THE NEXT YEAR after friggin Donnel Pumphrey leads the FBS in rushing has snake oil written all over it. he looks like a pretty generic runner playing against some HOT GARBAGE defensive guys. I mean he literally runs around - doesn't even juke - a flat footed MLB, who just stood there frozen, in about a 5 yard window, and goes on to score a 70 yd TD... that same situation he would have been speared by an NFL linebacker for 2 yard gain. I'm hesitant about this one... and I hope to god Licht and co are doing their due diligence and exploring other options... but as RBF has said, he seems to be the target right now... which would be really disappointing. Hell I'd rather take a flier on Bo Scarborough in the 4th or 5th instead of Penny in the second


Agree on all counts.

I don't like him. It's not a coincidence that he plays in the same offense Pumphrey (who looked like wet poop) did. I also can't stand his running style.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8292
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 358 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Cheb » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:36 am

Deuce wrote:
mdb1958 wrote:3rd and 2, could he be stopped? What if it was play-action and he just stayed in to block for Winston. I think a trend could be started of having a huge back problem is I dont think the NFL wants it. There would be to many bodies getting carted off. Linebackers would be giving self concussions.

But what ev, this guy will get you ten yards in two or three carries - till I'd see different.


Why would you want him when you could have a back that can block AND scamper for a few yards AND swing out and catch a pass? DeMarco Murray is better at all of those things than this guy.

There's a reason teams aren't doing this and it's not because the NFL doesn't want it. It's because he's too big, too slow, and doesn't know how to run like a RB. This guy's legs would be destroyed in his first game. There's absolutely no reason to put him at RB when there are plenty of capable RBs in this draft.


Agreed. He would be a one note song as a running back. Don't get me wrong, I love big backs, but there's a reason you don't see them this big, unless they are normally linemen who moonlight in the backfield or at tight end for specific packages.
Image
Cheb
 
Posts: 3529
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:00 pm
Location: West Coast is best coast
Has thanked: 60 times
Been thanked: 314 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby mdb1958 » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:58 am

Cheb wrote:
Deuce wrote:
Why would you want him when you could have a back that can block AND scamper for a few yards AND swing out and catch a pass? DeMarco Murray is better at all of those things than this guy.

There's a reason teams aren't doing this and it's not because the NFL doesn't want it. It's because he's too big, too slow, and doesn't know how to run like a RB. This guy's legs would be destroyed in his first game. There's absolutely no reason to put him at RB when there are plenty of capable RBs in this draft.


Agreed. He would be a one note song as a running back. Don't get me wrong, I love big backs, but there's a reason you don't see them this big, unless they are normally linemen who moonlight in the backfield or at tight end for specific packages.





unless they are normally linemen who moonlight in the backfield or at tight end for specific packages.[/quote]

And the lightbulb turns on.
mdb1958
 
Posts: 8908
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Naismith » Wed Apr 04, 2018 3:51 pm

I get Matt Waldman's draft guide and Dane Brugler's draft guide each year. I've seen a bunch of mocks with the Bucs taking Nick Chubb and for not explainable reason, I've been really opposed to it. Best reason I can give is that I don't like drafting guys with numerous knee ligaments injured. But Waldman has Chubb as his #1 RB, ahead of Barkley (who he is also high on). Excuse the formatting if it comes out screwy:

1. Nick Chubb, Georgia (5-11, 227)
Depth of Talent Score: 89.5 = Starter: Starting immediately with large role and learning on the go. (Borderline Franchise Talent)
The popular Nick Chubb narrative entering the 2018 NFL Combine was that once upon a time, Chubb was a freshman phenomenon—a four-star recruit who replaced the suspended Todd Gurley and rushed for 1,547 yards in 8 games. His performance prompted fellow SEC freshman stud Leonard Fournette to remark that Chubb was better than him.

After tying Herschel Walker’s consecutive 100-yard game streak at 13, Chubb tore the MCL, LCL, and PCL in his left knee against Tennessee as a sophomore. Chubb rehabbed his knee but didn’t look the same when he returned in 2016. Heading into the 2018 Draft, Chubb is regarded as a good prospect who before his injury, might have been mentioned in the same company as Saquon Barkley. Now, Chubb is a case of “what might have been.”

Earning one of the final spots as one of the top 5-7 running backs in this star-studded class is not a bad thing. Earning it because of future concerns about an unusual injury is fair. However, earning it for reasons that are based more on narrative than analysis is a different matter.

In terms of strength, explosion, and speed, Chubb was a freakish athlete in high school. Chubb squatted 700 pounds, power cleaned 390 pounds, and bench pressed 365 pounds. At the 2013 Nike Camp Combine, Chubb ran a 4.47-second, 40; a 4.10-second 20-Shuttle; and had a 40-inch vertical at 5’11”, 216 pounds.
In comparison, Barkley was a 193-pound runner at the 2014 Nike Combine, who ran a 4.66-second 40; 4.5- second 20 Shuttle; and earned a 36.2-inch vertical. Barkley has added 40-pounds to his frame and increased his strength, speed and explosion to elite levels.

Barkley’s 2018 Combine metrics are considered freakish. However, Chubb is two years removed from his knee injury and only five pounds lighter than Barkley with results extremely close to the Penn State runner and significantly different than his Nike workout.

The point isn’t to say Chubb is a bigger athletic freak than Barkley. Once players perform at certain tiers of athletic ability, the differences between them in strength, speed, and agility have diminishing returns if not applying this raw material to the refined processes of football knowledge and technique. Lamenting what Chubb could have been as an athlete is missing the point that he’s still within the top two tiers in every metric. It means comparing athletic ability among the backs in the highest tiers of athletic feats is not as important as judging how decision-making, ball security, leverage, and pass protection channel raw athletic talents into refined football skills.

Barkley’s (4.4-second 40) long speed is likely 1-2 steps faster than Chubb’s (4.52). It means that Barkley will gain a step that Chubb doesn’t around 25-35 yards downfield. Considering that only a handful of gains all year begin and end as straight-line shots up the middle for 25-35 yards without contact from a defender, the 40- yard dash remains an overrated metric to the public.

The shuttle, the three-cone, the vertical jump, and other measures of short-area explosion are better judges of athletic ability most appropriate to the position. From a metrics standpoint, Chubb was a close second to Barkley and it’s another layer of information that indicates concerns about Chubb’s health shouldn’t be nearly as serious as they were.

While I was waiting on the NFL Combine to receive another layer of confirmation that Chubb’s athletic ability was back, I’ve spent the past three years on various podcasts and social media telling those who asked about Ezekiel Elliott, Todd Gurley, and Leonard Fournette that Nick Chubb might be the best back I’ve seen in recent years. The film has been that promising.

This includes the 2016 opener where Chubb carried the ball 32 times for 222 yards against North Carolina just nine months removed from the knee injury. He looked like the old Chubb to me.

The next two weeks of totals weren’t as strong. If there’s a supporting argument that Chubb didn’t look right after the injury, it was these two games after that 32-touch debut following his 9-month rehab. I could see how a huge workload like that as the first performance after this injury might have been difficult to recover as quickly.

Chubb then sprained his ankle in Week 4 and didn’t earn much time for the next 5 games. However, that first game belies some of the analysis I’ve seen that he didn’t look as good. The slow recovery from a 32-touch game and ankle sprain further embedded the narrative entering 2017 that Chubb wasn’t the same.
I studied Chubb’s three healthy seasons and I find it difficult to see a significant difference between the three.

I’ve built the RSP’s default grading system to value running backs that can change direction with excellent footwork, balance, and run to open space with skill and wisdom. It’s why I think Nick Chubb has the goods to be the best running back prospect of the past five years.

When using a well-defined evaluation process, Chubb’s 2017 film tells the story as well as any healthy season he’s had. The first thing most will notice about him is his play strength and balance.

Whether his opposition is a defensive lineman, linebacker, or defensive back, Chubb pushes piles, breaks through reaches and wraps, and bounces off direct and indirect contact. He knows how to keep his knees high and feed wide through contact and his stiff-arm would require a permit to carry in public.
He often breaks multiple tackles of these types within the same run. Of the backs I’ve watched during the past few years, there are few who approach Chubb’s frequency of breaking multiple tackles per run.

This may not show up on yards after contact statistics because that data is not selective enough to judge power and balance in an accurate context. If a defensive back dives for a running back working past him at full speed and the defender’s arm fly swats the shin of the runner, every yard gained before that runner leaves the boundary, scores, or encounters different contact, is counted as yards after contact.

I’d prefer to see a separate statistic that measures yards through contact, because judging power and balance from yards after contact is inaccurate. We’re giving the fly swatter reach that preceded a back’s 75-yard run greater credence than the carry where an RB has to work off the contact of 3 defenders for a 7-yard gain on a 3rd and 2.

Yards through contact would be a better judge of power and finishing skill. Chubb’s yards through contact stats would be impressive. He routinely takes linebackers for rides of 3-5 yards due to his pad level and leg strength.

It would also be a better way to isolate these skills regardless of whether the back runs from shotgun versus spread-out defenses or heavy power sets facing stacked boxes.

When Chubb was a freshman, he eventually faced his share of stacked boxes once opponents figured out how good Chubb was. However, he wasn’t splitting time with Sony Michel and the offense wasn’t as predictable with its personnel.

Last year, Chubb and Michel had specific roles that made them more scheme-predictable. When Chubb came into the game, defenses loaded up to stop Chubb. With the exception of two games—Alabama and its superior defensive front, and the first matchup with Auburn (the one team that beat Alabama)—Chubb was productive every week.

In addition to contact balance and power, the reason Chubb thrives is his decision-making, quickness, and agility. Chubb is a scheme-versatile runner who is as good at gap runs as he is on zone runs. Although Isaiah Wynn wouldn’t answer Football Outsiders writer Charles McDonald’s question at the Combine: Which Georgia back was the best inside zone runner, the answer is definitely Chubb.

He excels at pressing creases deep into the line with smooth footwork and by sliding to the crease he set up. He knows how to manipulate the second level of the defense from the moment he takes the exchange until he reaches the entrance of the desired crease.

Chubb is as adept as any back in this class at varying the length and pace of his stride to set up blockers. He also possesses a good sense of timing about the lifespan of a crease. He quickly senses when he can’t wait on his linemen to open a hole and it’s time to drop the pads and push them.

Although no back will frequently avoid multiple points of penetration or deep penetration to the exchange point of the backfield, Chubb has the strength, quickness and agility to layer moves that get him into open space. His lateral cuts, spins, and jukes are quick, violent, and well- timed.

Chubb flips his hips so fast that he can change direction with a quick bounce in tight confines. He also can drop his weight to a quick stop and restart with strong acceleration.

When Chubb needs to make his burst sudden, it’s a breathtaking moment to see him hit that button on the controller and practically teleport five yards ahead. When he anticipates a crease opening, he can burst past the first two levels of defenders. He frequently sidesteps defensive backs when they’re shooting for his legs as he’s heading east-west and does it at the last-second.

Although considered a downhill guy, Chubb is far more agile than characterized. When he needs to turn the corner, he can beat most linebackers and defensive backs for positive yards up the sideline. He can jump cut and execute sharp lateral cuts with as little as one prep step. And just because he’s a physical back doesn’t mean he seeks contact. Chubb will eliminate direct angles or avoid contact in tight space altogether. When he has no choice, he’ll drop the pads and work under or through collisions.

What sets Chubb apart from this class and most of the backs in other classes is the depth of his maturity as a decision-maker. Whether it’s a gap or zone run, Chubb understands when to keep a run between the tackles but still have a plan to create in a tight window of space. When forced to take the short gain or loss over a foolish bounce-out based on the game script, Chubb rarely forces the play.

However, this doesn’t solely make Chubb a grinder. Give him a lane or fail to have 2-3 defenders wrap him early, and his acceleration and long speed will generate explosive plays. He also has that stamina to work through multiple hits, change direction several times, and still have the energy to accelerate past defensive backs.

Although Chubb had an awkward rep or two in a passing drill during the Combine, he was a frequent target as a freshman. After Chubb got hurt, Sony Michel earned the role as the primary receiving back in this offense and Chubb’s targets dwindled.

Even so, he catches the ball with his hands and he’s a reliable option in the flats. He’ll also do good work on screen plays although this was primarily Michel’s role at Georgia. I think he’ll be a mild surprise in the passing game as the years progress, but his eventual success depends on his landing spot and the philosophy the coaching staff has with running back usage.

Chubb is a decent pass protector with upside. His diagnosis and effort are consistently strong. When a teammate struggles and Chubb’s pre-snap assignment doesn’t attack, he’ll change focus and help out.

He’ll handle larger defenders with a good square, punch and hand position. His greatest weakness as a running back is cut blocks. He has some competent reps but he’s inconsistent with his approach and gets caught in no- man’s land when it’s time to shoot. As a result some of his efforts appear awkward.

The cut-blocking, the injury history (see the Durability section for more), and the perception that he’s no longer a top athlete at is position are his three greatest weaknesses. After watching his 2017 film and seeing the results of the Combine, I’m only concerned about the cut blocks and the event of a bad medical report.
Chubb reminds me of a bigger and faster Ray Rice combined with a wiser Doug Martin. He’s an every-down back with similar short-area explosion as Barkley, but better decision-making and power between the tackles.

Barkley will likely find the best fit to use him often in space but, based on my default view of what’s most frequently required of productive NFL running back, Chubb is just a little bit better.
User avatar
Naismith
 
Posts: 1349
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Doctor » Wed Apr 04, 2018 4:00 pm

Wow what a great read on Nick. I had no idea he was that athletic before his injury. Still have him 4th on my list but more of a 3b now with Michel. I'd still like him in the 2nd. But more and more I get the feeling that Barkley slips to us.
Image
User avatar
Doctor
 
Posts: 5030
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 6:54 pm
Location: Out of the Office. Will return next Fall.
Has thanked: 209 times
Been thanked: 149 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Naismith » Wed Apr 04, 2018 4:03 pm

Yeah, Brugler had him fifth in his. The common theme amongst both guides is that it's a good year to need a RB.
User avatar
Naismith
 
Posts: 1349
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby real bucs fan » Wed Apr 04, 2018 4:26 pm

Chubb is definitely in the mix for us in round 2.

For me there are 6 RBs I'll be happy with, and Chubb is in that group though he's 5th or 6th for me. Lotta wear on that young man, and Michel to me is just a better fit beside Barber.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7745
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Cheb » Wed Apr 04, 2018 4:29 pm

real bucs fan wrote:Chubb is definitely in the mix for us in round 2.

For me there are 6 RBs I'll be happy with, and Chubb is in that group though he's 5th or 6th for me. Lotta wear on that young man, and Michel to me is just a better fit beside Barber.


I get the upside for Michel, but we just let Charles Sims walk. I don't know if Dirk appreciates slashers at running back.
Image
Cheb
 
Posts: 3529
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:00 pm
Location: West Coast is best coast
Has thanked: 60 times
Been thanked: 314 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby real bucs fan » Wed Apr 04, 2018 5:08 pm

Cheb wrote:
real bucs fan wrote:Chubb is definitely in the mix for us in round 2.

For me there are 6 RBs I'll be happy with, and Chubb is in that group though he's 5th or 6th for me. Lotta wear on that young man, and Michel to me is just a better fit beside Barber.


I get the upside for Michel, but we just let Charles Sims walk. I don't know if Dirk appreciates slashers at running back.

Michel can actually run the ball. Sims is a pure receiver out of the backfield.

Michel reminds me quite a bit of Kamara last year. He may not be a 20 times a game rusher but he can run it and catch it and be dynamic.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7745
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Naismith » Wed Apr 04, 2018 5:25 pm

Not positive but I thought I read somewhere (likely Pewter Report) that the Bucs wanted Sims back but he wanted to try to get more on the open market. I'm not positive on that.
User avatar
Naismith
 
Posts: 1349
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2016 8:51 pm
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 85 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby real bucs fan » Wed Apr 04, 2018 8:49 pm

Pretty good stats to glance at for this years RB class:
https://www.fantasyguru.com/articles/ya ... cked-boxes

Image

Barkley avg over 7y/c vs a stacked box which is ridiculous. Also Guice faced a stacked box 73% of the time.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7745
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby terrytate » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:40 pm

There are good reason to be afraid of drafting a back with that kind of knee injury, but Chubb's is no worse than Willis McGahee's knee and he had a good career. As to Chubb, it normally takes 18 months to come back fully from that kind of knee injury. It's feasible that whoever drafts him is going to get a guy a lot closer to pre-injury Chubb than post-injury Chubb. I was originally hoping to get Chubb in the third. If we don't Barkley at 7, I think we'all get better value in the 4th than in the second. Chubb might still be there, there are a few other guys like Ballage who would be good picks on day 3.
User avatar
terrytate
 
Posts: 2188
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 1:49 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 89 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby real bucs fan » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:44 pm

terrytate wrote:There are good reason to be afraid of drafting a back with that kind of knee injury, but Chubb's is no worse than Willis McGahee's knee and he had a good career. As to Chubb, it normally takes 18 months to come back fully from that kind of knee injury. It's feasible that whoever drafts him is going to get a guy a lot closer to pre-injury Chubb than post-injury Chubb. I was originally hoping to get Chubb in the third. If we don't Barkley at 7, I think we'all get better value in the 4th than in the second. Chubb might still be there, there are a few other guys like Ballage who would be good picks on day 3.

If say we don't take a RB in rounds 1 or 2... really hope we keep a watchful eye on those 6 names as our 4th approaches. Swapping with the Giants there could be handy if we make a move up for a faller late round 3. I could see one of Chubb/Penny/Michel making it there.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7745
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby Cheb » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:45 pm

terrytate wrote:There are good reason to be afraid of drafting a back with that kind of knee injury, but Chubb's is no worse than Willis McGahee's knee and he had a good career. As to Chubb, it normally takes 18 months to come back fully from that kind of knee injury. It's feasible that whoever drafts him is going to get a guy a lot closer to pre-injury Chubb than post-injury Chubb. I was originally hoping to get Chubb in the third. If we don't Barkley at 7, I think we'all get better value in the 4th than in the second. Chubb might still be there, there are a few other guys like Ballage who would be good picks on day 3.


I highly doubt Chubb lasts to the late second, much less early fourth.
Image
Cheb
 
Posts: 3529
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 12:00 pm
Location: West Coast is best coast
Has thanked: 60 times
Been thanked: 314 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby real bucs fan » Wed Apr 04, 2018 10:50 pm

Cheb wrote:
terrytate wrote:There are good reason to be afraid of drafting a back with that kind of knee injury, but Chubb's is no worse than Willis McGahee's knee and he had a good career. As to Chubb, it normally takes 18 months to come back fully from that kind of knee injury. It's feasible that whoever drafts him is going to get a guy a lot closer to pre-injury Chubb than post-injury Chubb. I was originally hoping to get Chubb in the third. If we don't Barkley at 7, I think we'all get better value in the 4th than in the second. Chubb might still be there, there are a few other guys like Ballage who would be good picks on day 3.


I highly doubt Chubb lasts to the late second, much less early fourth.

We'll see, last year the RBs fell, but the difference this year is we don't have any character concerns with any of these guys. If one of the 6 RBs fell, I think it would be Chubb with teams scared of his workload, injury, and how he got bottled up by Bama while Michel ran wild...
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 7745
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 836 times
Been thanked: 109 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby MJW » Wed Apr 04, 2018 11:34 pm

Naismith wrote:
Barkley will likely find the best fit to use him often in space but, based on my default view of what’s most frequently required of productive NFL running back, Chubb is just a little bit better.[/i]


I agree 100%.

You're going to win rushing titles, you need to take lanes between the tackles and initiate contact. Guice is that guy. Chubb is that guy. Michel isn't exactly that guy, but he'll hit home runs that start with disciplined gap running.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8292
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 187 times
Been thanked: 358 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby LavonteDavid54 » Thu Apr 05, 2018 2:06 am

Well if the theory holds true that we take a guy who visits, then Chubb it is.
LavonteDavid54
 
Posts: 137
Joined: Thu Oct 05, 2017 8:52 pm
Has thanked: 17 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby mdb1958 » Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:07 am

LavonteDavid54 wrote:Well if the theory holds true that we take a guy who visits, then Chubb it is.


I'd rather give Devon Johnson a contract.

We could sign Mike James right now, but no, people want a shiny new Cadillac.
mdb1958
 
Posts: 8908
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 4:11 pm
Has thanked: 147 times
Been thanked: 82 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby beardmcdoug » Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:49 am

mdb1958 wrote:BMD he dont need to lower his shoulder or even open his eyes for that matter.


lmao

if he ends up on the squad as an UDFA, I'd be cool with it
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 2654
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 304 times
Been thanked: 197 times

Re: Draft Watch: Running Backs

Postby beardmcdoug » Thu Apr 05, 2018 8:53 am

MJW wrote:
Naismith wrote:
Barkley will likely find the best fit to use him often in space but, based on my default view of what’s most frequently required of productive NFL running back, Chubb is just a little bit better.[/i]


I agree 100%.

You're going to win rushing titles, you need to take lanes between the tackles and initiate contact. Guice is that guy. Chubb is that guy. Michel isn't exactly that guy, but he'll hit home runs that start with disciplined gap running.


I agree - but then again, look at what Kamara did last year (I was DEAD wrong about him - had him pegged as a would-be bust prior to the draft :drinkingdrunk: )
User avatar
beardmcdoug
 
Posts: 2654
Joined: Mon Sep 12, 2016 12:30 pm
Has thanked: 304 times
Been thanked: 197 times

PreviousNext

post

Return to College Football/Draft Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests