RB in round 1?

[DaBruinz]

true. but the argument can also be made that they were high 1st rounders and went to bad teams.

Really? Are you SURE that an argument can be made that they went to bad teams?

2010 - Arian Foster - Texans - Undrafted
2009 - Chris Johnson - Titans - Drafted 24th in the 1st round (Finished 13-3 in 2008)
2008 - Adrian Peterson - Vikings - Drafted 7th in the 1st round (Finished 8-8 in 2007)
2007 - LaDanian Tomlinson - Chargers - Drafted 5th in the 1st round (Finished 1-15 in 2000)
2006 - LaDanian Tomlinson - Chargers - Drafted 5th in the 1st round (Finished 1-15 in 2000)
2005 - Shaun Alexander - Seahawks - Drafted 19th in the 1st round (Finished 9-7 in 2000)
2004 - Curtis Martin - Jets - Drafted by Pats in 3rd round
2003 - Jamal Lewis - Baltimore - Drafted 5th in the 1st round (Finished 8-8 in 2000)
2002 - Ricky Williams - New Orleans - 1st in the 5 round (Finished 6-10 in 1999)
2001 - Priest Holmes - Baltimore - Undrafted.

So, of the last 10 rushing champs, 6 of them were drafted in the 1st round with Tomlinson winning twice. 4 of those 6 were drafted "early". But only 2 were drafted by team with losing records.

Not sure you can say that 2 of 10 fitting your statement forms an argument.

 

[DaBruinz]

Again, its not about "value" but "relative value" we agree. How many RBs will be taken before 28? 2-3 tops right? So is the value greater between #1RB and #3RB than it is between say #10 DL and #13 DL?? Let me also throw in that like FL last year...there is "value" in guys from AL who have won a National Championsh right? Now Jones and Dareus are beyond our reach but I can see Ingram falling to us much like Vince did.

This statement of yours flies in the face of what the Patriots have established as their modus operandi when deciding between players. Part of their evaluating players is that part of the player's value is determined by what the team need is. It doesn't take into consideration that the #1 RB is rated a 7.5 while the #2 is only a 6.3.

I did the research, here are the 1st and 2nd RBs taken the last 10 years
Spiller/Matthews
Moreno/Brown
McFadden/Stewart
Peterson/Lynch
Bush/Maroney
Brown/Benson
Jackson/Perry
McGahee/Johnson
Green/Duckett
Thomlinson/McAllister
With the exception for the Raiders misusing McF, I dont see a single year I would rather have the 2nd RB taken more than the first('10 too early to call). If this were the only factor (I know its not) I'd say Ingram is a SAFE pick in the first round...and isnt that another one of BBs peckadillos?? The more I think about it the more I see Ingram is the choice. I wont likely be happy about it but we have enough BJGEs in the backfield, nothing helps the passing game like a good running game!

This has nothing to do with how the Patriots look at players..

 

[VJCPatriot]

Really? Are you SURE that an argument can be made that they went to bad teams?

2010 - Arian Foster - Texans - Undrafted
2009 - Chris Johnson - Titans - Drafted 24th in the 1st round (Finished 13-3 in 2008)
2008 - Adrian Peterson - Vikings - Drafted 7th in the 1st round (Finished 8-8 in 2007)
2007 - LaDanian Tomlinson - Chargers - Drafted 5th in the 1st round (Finished 1-15 in 2000)
2006 - LaDanian Tomlinson - Chargers - Drafted 5th in the 1st round (Finished 1-15 in 2000)
2005 - Shaun Alexander - Seahawks - Drafted 19th in the 1st round (Finished 9-7 in 2000)
2004 - Curtis Martin - Jets - Drafted by Pats in 3rd round
2003 - Jamal Lewis - Baltimore - Drafted 5th in the 1st round (Finished 8-8 in 2000)
2002 - Ricky Williams - New Orleans - 1st in the 5 round (Finished 6-10 in 1999)
2001 - Priest Holmes - Baltimore - Undrafted.

So, of the last 10 rushing champs, 6 of them were drafted in the 1st round with Tomlinson winning twice. 4 of those 6 were drafted "early". But only 2 were drafted by team with losing records.

Not sure you can say that 2 of 10 fitting your statement forms an argument.

So 7 of the last 10 Rushing champs were 1st round picks? Intersting trend. Not to say that you can't get get very good value with a 3rd round pick. Sometimes you strike it rich with a Curtis Martin or a Michael Turner. But sometimes you don't. It's all about value.

Right now I'm thinking a G like Watkins or Pouncey in round 2. #17 a stud DE, and #28 is the flex pick for me. I could see us easily trading out from 28 as well.

 

[DaBruinz]

So 7 of the last 10 Rushing champs were 1st round picks? Intersting trend. Not to say that you can't get get very good value with a 3rd round pick. Sometimes you strike it rich with a Curtis Martin or a Michael Turner. But sometimes you don't. It's all about value.

Right now I'm thinking a G like Watkins or Pouncey in round 2. #17 a stud DE, and #28 is the flex pick for me. I could see us easily trading out from 28 as well.

I see them trading out of 32 more so than 28. The main reason being the 5th year. That is, of course, as long as the current rookie contract rules stay in effect.

 

[Off The Grid]

You're looking at it the wrong way. You don't draft a running back to lead the league in rushing yards. You draft him because you feel he's going to improve your offense. And there are plenty of playoff teams and Superbowl winners that owe their success to a high pick RB. It's really no different from any other position. You could say, when was the last time a team won with a first round receiver that led the league in receiving yards? I don't really know, because it's such a specific, useless, and meaningless stat. If you come across a great player in round one that you can say, "hey, this guy will definitely improve our team in area X." You draft him. It's simple as that. There are a ton of great first round backs, undrafted backs. Just like there are plenty of great first round receivers, and undrafted receivers.

FAIL!!! On SO many levels!! :bricks:

 

[JoeShmoe]

what point is having a 1st round rb if your o-line can't block well enough for him and the rest of the offense.

Koppen was horrible last year until mankins showed up.

Connolly was ok as was wendell.

The pats only have 1 proven tackle under contract in vollmer. Levoir and maneri are big question marks.

Light is a ufa and may have only a year or two left. I am hoping the pats draft an ot to develop opposite vollmer, while bringing light back short term.

I am also hoping the pats will draft an oc and an og because i don't feel that koppen can handle the job anymore.

As for counting on neal, i think you are more likely to win the lotter than get a full healthy season out of neal.

we have bingo

 

[meggett]

You're looking at it the wrong way. You don't draft a running back to lead the league in rushing yards. You draft him because you feel he's going to improve your offense. And there are plenty of playoff teams and Superbowl winners that owe their success to a high pick RB. It's really no different from any other position. You could say, when was the last time a team won with a first round receiver that led the league in receiving yards? I don't really know, because it's such a specific, useless, and meaningless stat. If you come across a great player in round one that you can say, "hey, this guy will definitely improve our team in area X." You draft him. It's simple as that. There are a ton of great first round backs, undrafted backs. Just like there are plenty of great first round receivers, and undrafted receivers.

I understand that. But the way that most people view running back success, is by yards and yards per carry. One of our most balanced teams was with Dillon coming in 3rd for the rushing title. Like i said, out of the last 20 years, 16 rushing champs were 1st round picks. so out of the last 20 seasons, 16 times a running back drafted in the 1st round was the best at their position. Not saying its conducive to winning a SB, but history shows that 1st round running backs have a greater chance for improving a teams running game in a profound way than those drafted after round 1. But like I said, people get lucky and find an Arian Foster or Terrell Davis. But that is more the exception than the rule.

 

[Snake Eyes]

You're looking at it the wrong way. You don't draft a running back to lead the league in rushing yards. You draft him because you feel he's going to improve your offense. And there are plenty of playoff teams and Superbowl winners that owe their success to a high pick RB. It's really no different from any other position. You could say, when was the last time a team won with a first round receiver that led the league in receiving yards? I don't really know, because it's such a specific, useless, and meaningless stat. If you come across a great player in round one that you can say, "hey, this guy will definitely improve our team in area X." You draft him. It's simple as that. There are a ton of great first round backs, undrafted backs. Just like there are plenty of great first round receivers, and undrafted receivers.

I think MaineMan hit the nail on the head but I'll put it in different terms, does spending a 1st round pick on Ingram maximize our Return on Investment?

Yes, he will help the running game, but will taking someone like Pouncey or Wilkerson help the team more than taking Ingram? If so, then it doesn't make sense to take Ingram at that point. He will help, yes, but he won't help as much as taking a different player that will have more impact.

 

[sbpatfan]

I think MaineMan hit the nail on the head but I'll put it in different terms, does spending a 1st round pick on Ingram maximize our Return on Investment?

Yes, he will help the running game, but will taking someone like Pouncey or Wilkerson help the team more than taking Ingram? If so, then it doesn't make sense to take Ingram at that point. He will help, yes, but he won't help as much as taking a different player that will have more impact.

Alright, well lets assume Pouncey or Wilkerson help the team more in the long run. Maybe they're the type of guys that can play a high level until their 30s. Well, when they turn 30 Brady won't be here. If we can get 3,4,5 good years out of Ingram why not take him? A guard or defensive end might be a better "investment" but with Brady's age I'm not sure theres a whole lot of time for investing.

I'm not saying we should draft Ingram or Leshoure, but if the Patriots feel they can make a considerable impact to the team, then why not? I want the lines addressed too, but we have a ton of picks. A running back could sneak in there. I personally want Watt even if it requires trading up.

 

[sbpatfan]

I understand that. But the way that most people view running back success, is by yards and yards per carry. One of our most balanced teams was with Dillon coming in 3rd for the rushing title. Like i said, out of the last 20 years, 16 rushing champs were 1st round picks. so out of the last 20 seasons, 16 times a running back drafted in the 1st round was the best at their position. Not saying its conducive to winning a SB, but history shows that 1st round running backs have a greater chance for improving a teams running game in a profound way than those drafted after round 1. But like I said, people get lucky and find an Arian Foster or Terrell Davis. But that is more the exception than the rule.

Oh, I agree with you. A first round pick on a running back is far from a waste. Good undrafted Running Backs are in the minority. I guess my argument was it's stupid to draft a back with the goal of getting him to win the rushing title. You just want good production, I mean sometimes the title is about whoring out carries like CJ in 2008 (?) or whatever.

 

[patchick]

I think MaineMan hit the nail on the head but I'll put it in different terms, does spending a 1st round pick on Ingram maximize our Return on Investment?

Yes, he will help the running game, but will taking someone like Pouncey or Wilkerson help the team more than taking Ingram? If so, then it doesn't make sense to take Ingram at that point. He will help, yes, but he won't help as much as taking a different player that will have more impact.

Agreed. Obviously, an RB drafted at #17 is likely to be much better than one drafted later. The question is whether the TEAM is going to be better with, say, RB #17 and DE #92 or the reverse.

Take your pick. (Let's assume for the exercise that #28 is an OT, #33 OLB, #60 OG, #74 traded for a 2012 2nd.):

17. DE J.J. Watt + 92. RB Delone Carter
17. RB Mark Ingram + 92. DE Lawrence Guy

 

[Snake Eyes]

Alright, well lets assume Pouncey or Wilkerson help the team more in the long run. Maybe they're the type of guys that can play a high level until their 30s. Well, when they turn 30 Brady won't be here. If we can get 3,4,5 good years out of Ingram why not take him? A guard or defensive end might be a better "investment" but with Brady's age I'm not sure theres a whole lot of time for investing.

I'm not saying we should draft Ingram or Leshoure, but if the Patriots feel they can make a considerable impact to the team, then why not? I want the lines addressed too, but we have a ton of picks. A running back could sneak in there. I personally want Watt even if it requires trading up.

I don’t know why you’d think that a younger and nastier O-line wouldn’t help immediately, they’d be better able to protect Brady and better able to open up holes for our RBs.

The lines are something of a paradox: they’re at the same time the most vital and least appreciated part of the team, everyone sees the QB throw the pass and the RB charge up the field but it’s the lines that allow those things to happen, look at how Pittsburgh’s offense simply flattened out in the AFC championship against the Jets when Pouncey (whose Arm length is just fine) went down. The line is the first point of contact with the opposition, and their ability ripples through the rest of the guys on the field.

I’m sure Ingram can help this team but think of it like this, all other things being equal, would you invest your money in a stock that averages a 20% return or in one that averages a 7% return? The guys with the bling and rings will chose the 20% every time, and that’s what I want for the team.

 

[jeffbiologist]

Agreed. Obviously, an RB drafted at #17 is likely to be much better than one drafted later. The question is whether the TEAM is going to be better with, say, RB #17 and DE #92 or the reverse.

Take your pick. (Let's assume for the exercise that #28 is an OT, #33 OLB, #60 OG, #74 traded for a 2012 2nd.):

17. DE J.J. Watt + 92. RB Delone Carter
17. RB Mark Ingram + 92. DE Lawrence Guy

I think its a matter of getting a starter, a plug and play guy. I think that a OL or a DL not only has a higher chance of being a bust but also requires more coaching to get on the field. This is likely the last time we can get the highest rated RB to put alongside TB, and that cant be overstated. Elway got his rings because of TD, Ingram could be that for this team. Personally I want a plug and play DE/OLB like everyone else here....and would love to get both Watt and Carimi in the first and not resign Light, pick up Moffit in the 3rd and make Wisconsin the next Florida. Wishful thinking..

 

[jeffbiologist]

This statement of yours flies in the face of what the Patriots have established as their modus operandi when deciding between players. Part of their evaluating players is that part of the player's value is determined by what the team need is. It doesn't take into consideration that the #1 RB is rated a 7.5 while the #2 is only a 6.3.



This has nothing to do with how the Patriots look at players..

Need. Value. Lets take it a imaginary step further. If #1 RB is ranked say 8.1 and #2 7.1 and the #7DE is ranked 7.4 and the #10DE is ranked 7.2 it doesnt make a difference?? Of course it does! If player #1 is a plug and play guy and #2 is a rotational DL who has more "value"? I'm not arguing upside, but IMHO the Pats fill a hole with their 1st round picks and dont take chances. With the exception of Meriweather didnt every other 1st round pick start as a rookie?? With the ammo we have in draft picks we can trade UP from 28 if need be, but all this is likely moot anyways because Ingram wont make it to 17 in most opinions.

 

[patchick]

IThis is likely the last time we can get the highest rated RB to put alongside TB, and that cant be overstated. Elway got his rings because of TD

This is a very fair point. One problem, though, is that all "highest rated RBs" aren't created equal. This is the first class in years with only 1 RB rated in the first round, and none in the top dozen picks.

Ingram looks like an NFL lead back. He has a good balance of skills, and solid vision and instincts. But athletically, he's remarkably average for a first rounder. I'm not convinced he's a genuine impact player -- which is what I want out of my top pick, at any position.

 

[MaineMan]

I think its a matter of getting a starter, a plug and play guy. I think that a OL or a DL not only has a higher chance of being a bust but also requires more coaching to get on the field. This is likely the last time we can get the highest rated RB to put alongside TB, and that cant be overstated. Elway got his rings because of TD, Ingram could be that for this team. Personally I want a plug and play DE/OLB like everyone else here....and would love to get both Watt and Carimi in the first and not resign Light, pick up Moffit in the 3rd and make Wisconsin the next Florida. Wishful thinking..

Couple things.

Ingram may well be the best RB in this draft class. However, this doesn't mean that he'd be the best RB in, say, the 2012 class. It's entirely possible that the #3RB next draft would be available to the Pats at the #32 pick and yet be better than Ingram.

In contrast, this is the first draft class in a long while that features a couple legit prospects who stand a good chance of excelling at RDE in BB's 3-4. That, IMHO, is a far more rare occurrence and much more likely to be the last time we'll see THIS opportunity for quite awhile. But these guys will go quick and I'd much rather grab one of them even if Ingram is still on the board.

Finally, if we're looking for an inside runner who has a dimension or two more to his game than BGE does, we can get a guy like that in the 3rd or 4th round out of this class. I don't see Ingram offering all THAT much more than one of them - not enough, at any rate, to warrant passing on the opportunity to take a high-end DE, OL or OLB in order to take him instead.

 

[meggett]

Couple things.

Ingram may well be the best RB in this draft class. However, this doesn't mean that he'd be the best RB in, say, the 2012 class. It's entirely possible that the #3RB next draft would be available to the Pats at the #32 pick and yet be better than Ingram.

In contrast, this is the first draft class in a long while that features a couple legit prospects who stand a good chance of excelling at RDE in BB's 3-4. That, IMHO, is a far more rare occurrence and much more likely to be the last time we'll see THIS opportunity for quite awhile. But these guys will go quick and I'd much rather grab one of them even if Ingram is still on the board.

Finally, if we're looking for an inside runner who has a dimension or two more to his game than BGE does, we can get a guy like that in the 3rd or 4th round out of this class. I don't see Ingram offering all THAT much more than one of them - not enough, at any rate, to warrant passing on the opportunity to take a high-end DE, OL or OLB in order to take him instead.

Fair point. But if you look at the draft order, there are only two 3-4 teams picking between our pick at 17 and 28. ( maybe 3, i dont know what KC runs), so not factoring in trades, which is impossible anyway, if we are looking for a 3-4 DE or OLB at 17, there is a good chance he or someone close in value will be there at 28.

17 New England Patriots 3-4
18 San Diego Chargers 3-4
19 New York Giants 4-3
20 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 4-3
21 Kansas City Chiefs ?
22 Indianapolis Colts 4-3
23 Philadelphia Eagles 4-3
24 New Orleans Saints 4-3
25 Seattle Seahawks 4-3
26 Baltimore Ravens 3-4
27 Atlanta Falcons 4-3
28 New England Patriots 3-4

 

[jeffbiologist]

This is a very fair point. One problem, though, is that all "highest rated RBs" aren't created equal. This is the first class in years with only 1 RB rated in the first round, and none in the top dozen picks.

Ingram looks like an NFL lead back. He has a good balance of skills, and solid vision and instincts. But athletically, he's remarkably average for a first rounder. I'm not convinced he's a genuine impact player -- which is what I want out of my top pick, at any position.

I agree but I think he is closer to say Steven Jackson than William Green right?? I like the guy and could understand and accept the pick if we think he is a 3 down RB. With BJGE in the game you simply dont have to cover the screen pass or worry about him splitting out. I know alot of guys see all the successful UDFA RBs but for every success there there are a TON of failures(shoot just look at our success rate on 3rd round picks,lol). Our first round pick isnt as much about a guaranteed success as it is about a non-failure dont you agree?? And I simply dont buy those guys who say you draft a OL/DL because he will be better longer. Its the value in the length of contract, if its only 4-5 years so what, that means we wont have to pay him big money on the 2nd contract and we have that money to go get a good FA. If we draft Ingram he will walk in being our best RB by far so there is impact as a player from the get go. Sorry to be so scattered...

 

[MaineMan]

I agree but I think he is closer to say Steven Jackson than William Green right?? I like the guy and could understand and accept the pick if we think he is a 3 down RB. With BJGE in the game you simply dont have to cover the screen pass or worry about him splitting out. I know alot of guys see all the successful UDFA RBs but for every success there there are a TON of failures(shoot just look at our success rate on 3rd round picks,lol). Our first round pick isnt as much about a guaranteed success as it is about a non-failure dont you agree?? And I simply dont buy those guys who say you draft a OL/DL because he will be better longer. Its the value in the length of contract, if its only 4-5 years so what, that means we wont have to pay him big money on the 2nd contract and we have that money to go get a good FA. If we draft Ingram he will walk in being our best RB by far so there is impact as a player from the get go. Sorry to be so scattered...

I could say the same thing about Kendall Hunter, just as one example. The point being that we don't really need a 1st round RB to immediately improve our ground game. Guys who can make an immediate impact for us there are widely available in nearly every draft.

OTOH, I believe we DO need the best 1st round 3-4 DE we can get our hands on to move our 30-front from awful back to being very good which, again IMHO, is a much more desperate need for elite-level help than our ground game.

And such guys are very rarely available. There might be 2 such guys in this draft (possibly 3) who'd be near perfect for that spot (and all might ALSO be considered great prospects by a 4-3 team). In the past 3-4 drafts combined, there might have been 2-3 such guys TOTAL and all but one (Odrick) were off the board before the Pats picked. If even just one of this year's prospects is off the board by #17, there's no way I could possibly get behind taking a chance that we miss out on both the others just for Ingram.

 

[Ochmed Jones]

But if you look at the draft order, there are only two 3-4 teams picking between our pick at 17 and 28. ( maybe 3, i dont know what KC runs), so not factoring in trades, which is impossible anyway, if we are looking for a 3-4 DE or OLB at 17, there is a good chance he or someone close in value will be there at 28.

17 New England Patriots 3-4
18 San Diego Chargers 3-4
19 New York Giants 4-3
20 Tampa Bay Buccaneers 4-3
21 Kansas City Chiefs ?
22 Indianapolis Colts 4-3
23 Philadelphia Eagles 4-3
24 New Orleans Saints 4-3
25 Seattle Seahawks 4-3
26 Baltimore Ravens 3-4
27 Atlanta Falcons 4-3
28 New England Patriots 3-4

Interesting observation. Add in the fact that San Diego is looking to go up, possibly trading with Washington or the Vikings and that leaves only two 3-4 teams between our picks.

I'm hearing that Seattle is interested in moving up as well, might BB help them accomplish that goal?