Article about RB Value

Dedicated to College Football and Draft discussion.
post

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby Super K » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:12 am

real bucs fan wrote:
Naismith wrote:Young Reggie Bush would be a stud in today's NFL.

I am confident Barkley is going to be very good. IMO, no RB will ever be worth the seventh pick, though.

Great point.

Just so we have it down, who are the posters against Barkley at 7? MJW, Bootz, Naismith... a few others at least.


He's obviously not my 1st choice...but my top 4 are probably:

Nelson
Chubb
Barkely
Vea
User avatar
Super K
 
Posts: 7170
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 3:26 pm
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 209 times

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby terrytate » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:21 am

Barkley did follow his blocked most of the time. The only times he went offroad was when his blocking was so badly outmatched that he had to go full on Barry Sanders to produce. When you watch his full games you will need that it was when he was constantly having to dodge people within a blink of taking the ball that he would freelance.
User avatar
terrytate
 
Posts: 2317
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 1:49 am
Has thanked: 11 times
Been thanked: 100 times

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby MJW » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:23 am

real bucs fan wrote:
MJW wrote:
So was Reggie Bush. If you're okay with drafting that, mazel tov. I hope we're not.

Barkley is 230lbs and can squat 600 pounds.

The proof will be in the pudding anyway.


Emmitt Smith was 5'9 and probably couldn't do 15 reps. What's your point?

But I agree, it will all get sussed out, and if we don't draft him, it will all be forgotten in three months when your latest running back fetish target emerges.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby MJW » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:24 am

terrytate wrote:Barkley did follow his blocked most of the time. The only times he went offroad was when his blocking was so badly outmatched that he had to go full on Barry Sanders to produce. When you watch his full games you will need that it was when he was constantly having to dodge people within a blink of taking the ball that he would freelance.


Not what I saw. Occasionally, but it often made no difference if he had blocks or not. His first instinct is to bounce outside.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby MJW » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:25 am

Naismith wrote:Young Reggie Bush would be a stud in today's NFL.


Sure. But he wouldn't be LaDanian Tomlinson, which is what some people are selling Barkley as.
Image
User avatar
MJW
 
Posts: 8660
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 5:17 am
Location: Nebraska
Has thanked: 197 times
Been thanked: 378 times

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby BucaRican » Thu Apr 26, 2018 11:53 am

If Barkley is there he better be the pick, not sure why this is even an argument. We saw how productive this offense could be with mediocre RB. Barkley checks every single box. Not sure why this confuses many people.
Image
BucaRican
 
Posts: 933
Joined: Thu Jan 07, 2016 10:53 am
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby real bucs fan » Thu Apr 26, 2018 1:13 pm

MJW wrote:
real bucs fan wrote:Barkley is 230lbs and can squat 600 pounds.

The proof will be in the pudding anyway.


Emmitt Smith was 5'9 and probably couldn't do 15 reps. What's your point?

But I agree, it will all get sussed out, and if we don't draft him, it will all be forgotten in three months when your latest running back fetish target emerges.

Hopefully Licht learned his lesson after listening to you last year and waiting until day 3 to draft McNichols. Get this team a stud either at 7 or round 2.
Image
real bucs fan
 
Posts: 8097
Joined: Wed Jan 14, 2015 2:59 pm
Has thanked: 894 times
Been thanked: 116 times

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby BucJordan » Thu Apr 26, 2018 2:54 pm

MJW wrote:
terrytate wrote:Barkley did follow his blocked most of the time. The only times he went offroad was when his blocking was so badly outmatched that he had to go full on Barry Sanders to produce. When you watch his full games you will need that it was when he was constantly having to dodge people within a blink of taking the ball that he would freelance.


Not what I saw. Occasionally, but it often made no difference if he had blocks or not. His first instinct is to bounce outside.



I'm not going to pretend to have watched enough snaps (much less All-22 film) to argue over this, but Graham Barfield charts incoming rookie RBs on what he calls "yards created," his attempt to separate the yards an OL blocks for versus what the RB does on his own talent - kind of like a more nuanced version of YAC. It's a bold thing to try to do, but still provides an interesting data point.

Basically, he found Penn States OL to be the worst of the 13 he charted in 2018, and tied for 3rd worst for the last three years he has been charting (only FSU in 2017 and La Tech in 2016 were worse), blocking for an average of 0.73 yards per carry. He also splits the charts into personnel groupings and situations so it's a pretty interesting read.
BucJordan
 
Posts: 443
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:16 pm
Has thanked: 8 times
Been thanked: 22 times

Re: Article about RB Value

Postby Zarniwoop » Thu Apr 26, 2018 3:01 pm

Zarniwoop wrote:that's a cool article...thanks for posting.

in order to truly appreciate its value, i think a comparison is necessary for other positions -- particularly WR, QB



OK, so i was interested in this idea and in few minutes it took me to eat my lunch sandwich i looked at the drafts from 2010 to 2015...i think the 538 article, while good, paints RB's as a bad value by simply looking at the absolute number who made it to SUperbowls and where they were drafted....of course the # and % is going to be extremely low because so many RB's get drafted and so few make a superbowl. But the same holds true for every single position. So for the article to be truly good, it needs a relative dimension.



I didn't want to spend more than 10 minutes so obviously this is very surface level

I wanted to compare the "hit" rate for QB's vs RB's in the first round. obviously the best way to do this would be using a ton of factors to measure success and maybe someone already did this (passing yards, QB rating, TD's, Rush Yards, Rec Yards, etc). but i don't have time to do this but i just wanted to scratch the surface.

so i looked at the # of QB and RB's taken in the first round and to see how many of those players made a pro-bowl. obviously there are lots of flaws with this (too numerous to mention) but it was a neat exercise nonetheless.



QBs -- 16 QB's taken in the first round, 5 have made at least pro-bowl = 31%

RBs - 9 RB's taken in the first round, 6 have made at least one pro-bowl = 67%




In no way am I suggesting drafting a RB at 7 is a good idea (or a bad idea). I just think that article is far too narrow in scope to provide tons of value.
Zarniwoop
 
Posts: 5976
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2015 12:23 pm
Has thanked: 283 times
Been thanked: 275 times

Previous

post

Return to College Football/Draft Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Rocker, Zarniwoop and 5 guests