OT: Lamar Jackson

[BaconGrundleCandy]

I knew that you can't write in the English language or are able to use a computer to the point to cut/and narrate clips because that you have abundantly shown here and on your cute, little irrelevant Twitter account.

But I was not aware that you can't even read. Seriously here are the words.. and let me help you by emphasizing:



Guess what the nobody is in relation to in this sentence, Professor Bacon. And don't even start to try to argue this on a literal basis because you, me and everyone knows what this is supposed to mean.

Stop gatekeeping as if you are some kind of authority about college players there is a sub-board full of them here. You are not special.

People who looked a bit into him knew that a) he is not a great passer and b) he is deadly with his legs. But as I said the average person didn't realize how good he actually was and looking where he was taking neither did about a third of the league.

Not sure you can speak for average posters considering how awful your post are.

Anyone paying the slightest bit of attention knew how good of a runner he was. You don't have to be a draftnik or excellent at grading picks like me to understand that.

Last year you were literally stealing Lazars tweets & this year it's all abt "entitlement" bc you're riding Dave Brown's ****. Remind me of a teenager trying to find himself. Its kinda cute. Borderline plagiarism & kinda pathetic you need others to help you form an opinion but cute.

 

[VJCPatriot]

Well the Patriots could have had Lamar Jackson instead of Sony '2 yards and a cloud of dust' Michel. The question is would Burkhead plus White have been enough to win through the 2018 postseason? Considering that we also had Gronk I'm going to boldly guess yes, we could have afforded to draft Brady's heir apparent and still challenge for and win the Superbowl in 2018 without Michel's contributions.

 

[Kontradiction]

Well the Patriots could have had Lamar Jackson instead of Sony '2 yards and a cloud of dust' Michel. The question is would Burkhead plus White have been enough to win through the 2018 postseason? Considering that we also had Gronk I'm going to boldly guess yes, we could have afforded to draft Brady's heir apparent and still challenge for and win the Superbowl in 2018 without Michel's contributions.

If they liked Jackson, and many reports suggested they did, they could have had Wynn, Jackson, and Chark... all without having to trade. Yikes.

 

[supafly]

Well the Patriots could have had Lamar Jackson instead of Sony '2 yards and a cloud of dust' Michel. The question is would Burkhead plus White have been enough to win through the 2018 postseason? Considering that we also had Gronk I'm going to boldly guess yes, we could have afforded to draft Brady's heir apparent and still challenge for and win the Superbowl in 2018 without Michel's contributions.

This will likely be an unpopular take, but I’m going to say no. I don’t believe that they would’ve run the ball nearly as effectively without Michel last year. He was really looking good at times, and they relied on flipping that switch late in the season where Brady only threw 2 TDs in the three postseason games.

 

[sambam94]

anyone who keeps insisting the Lamar can't throw the ball has not been paying attention.

 

[Kontradiction]

This will likely be an unpopular take, but I’m going to say no. I don’t believe that they would’ve run the ball nearly as effectively without Michel last year. He was really looking good at times, and they relied on flipping that switch late in the season where Brady only threw 2 TDs in the three postseason games.

Yeah, I’m not ready to give up on Michel yet. It doesn’t look good for him, but it’s still early. But we still could have had Chark and took Duke Dawson instead. That’s indefensible.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Even Barkley in the top 10 is crazy. Great player to have but they've won 7 games since the selected him.

Obviously not his fault but the value, impact just isn't there.

Regarding Sony it's a mystery. He was a dynamic player in college that flashed almost every game. So from a fit pov, he made sense. If you're taking a RB late Rd1-early 2nd, you want that type of RB.

I'm sure I'm forgetting someone but I can't remember a player looking/used as differently as Sony. Very strange case.

Outside of QB, which positions will translate directly to wins? Of course Barkley was a good pick, unless you feel that a top 5 pick should only be used on a QB (which is an argument I could buy.). But there are plenty of outstanding hall of fame talented running backs, receivers, o linemen, d linemen, defensive backs, linebackers, and tight ends who are great picks but don’t assure you’re going to win more than 4 games a year if the rest of the team is a dumpster fire (like the NYGs).

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Outside of QB, which positions will translate directly to wins? Of course Barkley was a good pick, unless you feel that a top 5 pick should only be used on a QB (which is an argument I could buy.). But there are plenty of outstanding hall of fame talented running backs, receivers, o linemen, d linemen, defensive backs, linebackers, and tight ends who are great picks but don’t assure you’re going to win more than 4 games a year if the rest of the team is a dumpster fire (like the NYGs).

Good player, bad pick. Forget abt translating to wins for a second.

Why pick a RB that high when history doesn't just suggest but is proven you can find them anywhere. 2019 - Chubb, Carson, Cook, Henry, Hyde, Mack, Lindsey, Mixon, Jones, Bell, Kamara. 49ers are winning w Breida & Mostert. All these guys were taken after Rd1 & some not drafted.

In terms of translation to wins its certainly not a concrete stat but rather a combination of value & what position effects/touches/elevates the other 10 guys on the field.

RB is arguably the most dependent position in football. So many things have to happen in order for that back to do his job.

For instance a guy like Q Nelson protects the QB, opens up holes for RBs, allows enough for a WR to run his route & get open along w other things.

Now circle back to value, effectiveness etc. A player like Nelson brings so much more of that than Barkley.

Rd 1 should be for QB/OL/DL/CB w very few exceptions like a great S. Very, very few RB's/WR's have that type of ability to raise the level of play of the other 10 guys.

Back to Barkley. If you're taking a player in the lottery that player should be part of you're long term plan. You're anticipating a cornerstone type player. NYG aren't winning any time soon & will either have to pay Barkley a **** ton of $ which is always a bad thing. Look at RBs after they get paid & how that works out. Or let the #2 overall pick walk. Neither are good options.

 

[fightingirish595]

Good player, bad pick. Forget abt translating to wins for a second.

Why pick a RB that high when history doesn't just suggest but is proven you can find them anywhere. 2019 - Chubb, Carson, Cook, Henry, Hyde, Mack, Lindsey, Mixon, Jones, Bell, Kamara. 49ers are winning w Breida & Mostert. All these guys were taken after Rd1 & some not drafted.

In terms of translation to wins its certainly not a concrete stat but rather a combination of value & what position effects/touches/elevates the other 10 guys on the field.

RB is arguably the most dependent position in football. So many things have to happen in order for that back to do his job.

For instance a guy like Q Nelson protects the QB, opens up holes for RBs, allows enough for a WR to run his route & get open along w other things.

Now circle back to value, effectiveness etc. A player like Nelson brings so much more of that than Barkley.

Rd 1 should be for QB/OL/DL/CB w very few exceptions like a great S. Very, very few RB's/WR's have that type of ability to raise the level of play of the other 10 guys.

Back to Barkley. If you're taking a player in the lottery that player should be part of you're long term plan. You're anticipating a cornerstone type player. NYG aren't winning any time soon & will either have to pay Barkley a **** ton of $ which is always a bad thing. Look at RBs after they get paid & how that works out. Or let the #2 overall pick walk. Neither are good options.

Because when the team is good the RB is often best athlete on the field ( like saquon, Mccaff, etc). Matchup nightmares. Imagine one of those guys in our offense?

Runningbacks are savages. Hardest position physically in the sport. Your points are right on. But I can think of atleast 3 other moves that are way more of an issue than drafting Saquon.

The value of a 3 down back is increasing

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Because when the team is good the RB is often best athlete on the field ( like saquon, Mccaff, etc). Matchup nightmares. Imagine one of those guys in our offense?

Runningbacks are savages. Hardest position physically in the sport. Your points are right on. But I can think of atleast 3 other moves that are way more of an issue than drafting Saquon.

The value of a 3 down back is increasing

Ok but the Giants have been terrible & haven't gotten any better w Barkley. We knew exactly what would happen if they picked him & they haven't looked any better. And again you can find these guys anywhere. Why spend a top 3-5 pick when I know I can get similar/better production from guys in the later Rds or not even drafted at all? No one knew who Aaron Jones & Austin Ekeler were unless you are a hardcore college football fan but they're arguably the most important pieces on their teams this year.

Taking Barkley or any RB over Q Nelson is a dumb move. Esp in the lottery.

I'm well aware of the life span of RB's. They take a pounding but the guys in the trenches are basically having fist fights 60 snaps a game against other 300+lb men. Sometimes doubled almost every snap.

Have to say its kinda sad people actually think we don't get to or win the SB w/out Sony. Defending the Barkley pick when guys like Nelson, Jackson, Chubb, Edmunds, James & others were available.
RB's are important but in terms of value & effect its not even close compared to QB/OL etc

 

[fightingirish595]

Ok but the Giants have been terrible & haven't gotten any better w Barkley. We knew exactly what would happen if they picked him & they haven't looked any better. And again you can find these guys anywhere. Why spend a top 3-5 pick when I know I can get similar/better production from guys in the later Rds or not even drafted at all? No one knew who Aaron Jones & Austin Ekeler were unless you are a hardcore college football fan but they're arguably the most important pieces on their teams this year.

Taking Barkley or any RB over Q Nelson is a dumb move. Esp in the lottery.

I'm well aware of the life span of RB's. They take a pounding but the guys in the trenches are basically having fist fights 60 snaps a game against other 300+lb men. Sometimes doubled almost every snap.

Have to say its kinda sad people actually think we don't get to or win the SB w/out Sony. Defending the Barkley pick when guys like Nelson, Jackson, Chubb, Edmunds, James & others were available.
RB's are important but in terms of value & effect its not even close compared to QB/OL etc

I think we def win the super bowl without Sony last year so agreed there.

It Takes multiple years to build a great o line. The giants cut both starting players on the right side of their line last year and saquon had an absurd season. How many times have you seen a team do. Speaks volumes about saquons talent to perform like he did as a rookie despite the circumstances. Impossible to say who could’ve produced the way he did last year behind a line like that.

I’m definitely letting personal bias get in the way here for sure. I’ve followed Saquon for a while, huge fan. I’d generally agree with the idea of not taking a back with the 2nd overall pick. Could make the same argument about a guard though. If your taking one in the top 5 he better be a hall of famer.

Gettlemans biggest crimes were keeping 1) Eli and drafting jones and 2) signing Odell just to trade him after the season. He should’ve traded him prior to the 2018 season. There’s no way Gettleman could plan on competing this year by taking Jones at 6 and keeping Eli. Point here being there isn’t one non QB pick that would’ve changed anything. I’m not even sure a QB changes anything. The team is so poorly coached and a disaster

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

I think we def win the super bowl without Sony last year so agreed there.

It Takes multiple years to build a great o line. The giants cut both starting players on the right side of their line last year and saquon had an absurd season. How many times have you seen a team do. Speaks volumes about saquons talent to perform like he did as a rookie despite the circumstances. Impossible to say who could’ve produced the way he did last year behind a line like that.

I’m definitely letting personal bias get in the way here for sure. I’ve followed Saquon for a while, huge fan. I’d generally agree with the idea of not taking a back with the 2nd overall pick. Could make the same argument about a guard though. If your taking one in the top 5 he better be a hall of famer.

Gettlemans biggest crimes were keeping 1) Eli and drafting jones and 2) signing Odell just to trade him after the season. He should’ve traded him prior to the 2018 season. There’s no way Gettleman could plan on competing this year by taking Jones at 6 and keeping Eli. Point here being there isn’t one non QB pick that would’ve changed anything. I’m not even sure a QB changes anything. The team is so poorly coached and a disaster

I agree w a lot here (team most likely being bad/Gettleman) but aren't you making or helping my point when you bring up how shaky their OL was?

Again agreed on the team most likely being bad but I'd rather be bad like Arizona, trending up w a QB as opposed to NYG. Who didn't have Jones & again were no different w or w/out Barkley.


I'd much rather go w a Nelson, gamble on Lamar or trade back for a B Chubb, Jaire, Minkah, Vea ... I like all 3 options better then taking a RB that high. Who's value won't be the same after his 1st contract. Again you take a player that high & you're thinking down the road (cornerstone/2nd contract). Look at how RBs have faired after that 1st contract. Not good at all.

There's so much evidence pointing away from that pick I can't ignore it.

 

[fightingirish595]

I agree w a lot here (team most likely being bad/Gettleman) but aren't you making or helping my point when you bring up how shaky their OL was?

Again agreed on the team most likely being bad but I'd rather be bad like Arizona, trending up w a QB as opposed to NYG. Who didn't have Jones & again were no different w or w/out Barkley.


I'd much rather go w a Nelson, gamble on Lamar or trade back for a B Chubb, Jaire, Minkah, Vea ... I like all 3 options better then taking a RB that high. Who's value won't be the same after his 1st contract. Again you take a player that high & you're thinking down the road (cornerstone/2nd contract). Look at how RBs have faired after that 1st contract. Not good at all.

There's so much evidence pointing away from that pick I can't ignore it.

And I Would have to have a lot of cognitive dissonance to look past that because I laugh at teams that throw big money at free agent running backs.

In the case of Saquon, I still see him as a face of the franchise type player. 10 year plus productive hall of fame career. I think he can go down as the best ever not named Jim brown. That’s a major reason why I refuse to call it a bad pick.

Gettleman needed to just trade Odell after 2017 and get a first round pick in the 2018 and 2019 draft and whatever else he could get. I really can’t get over how he wasted so much cap space and a roster spot on the current back up QB

Could’ve grabbed Saquon and got some pieces along both lines.

dudes a master at picking defensive lineman though

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Ok but the Giants have been terrible & haven't gotten any better w Barkley. We knew exactly what would happen if they picked him & they haven't looked any better. And again you can find these guys anywhere. Why spend a top 3-5 pick when I know I can get similar/better production from guys in the later Rds or not even drafted at all?

You can really find a similar/better RB like Barkley anywhere? Really? You generally have a very good understanding of talent, so your statement is baffling. Have you watched him play? He’s playing on a high ankle sprain right now so probably not the fairest time to evaluate him; he was the best RB in football last year despite seeing a lot of stacked boxes due to an anemic passing game. The guys you listed are not even close to Barkley. Take someone like Kamara and put him on the Giants, with their horrible supporting cast, and he’d be half the player he appears to be with Brees and Thomas around him.

The Giants obviously thought they’d be better now than they are; had they made better roster decisions in other areas, and found an immediate impact QB, they would certainly be much better off with an all-pro running back as well. And it’s very possible that they’ll improve in the next three years, or perhaps they’ll have Barkley for longer than that. Running backs typically hit the wall earlier than most players, but that doesn’t mean he’s going to be cooked at age 25.

Barkley is considered a generational talent. The Browns strongly considered taking him at #1 despite liking Mayfield. He’s an outlier when it comes to when to draft running backs. I’ve generally been very on board about the devaluation of running backs and also agree that generally it’s the blocking and other players on offense that have more to do with the running game success. But I can also acknowledge an obvious outlier when you’re talking about a guy who is this good.

Just like other elite players, he needs a strong team around him, and if he does get that chance, he could be player that puts the Giants over the top. Many teams have drafted studs but haven’t gotten better despite it. It doesn’t mean the player wasn’t the right pick.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

You can really find a similar/better RB like Barkley anywhere? Really? You generally have a very good understanding of talent, so your statement is baffling. Have you watched him play? He’s playing on a high ankle sprain right now so probably not the fairest time to evaluate him; he was the best RB in football last year despite seeing a lot of stacked boxes due to an anemic passing game. The guys you listed are not even close to Barkley. Take someone like Kamara and put him on the Giants, with their horrible supporting cast, and he’d be half the player he appears to be with Brees and Thomas around him.

The Giants obviously thought they’d be better now than they are; had they made better roster decisions in other areas, and found an immediate impact QB, they would certainly be much better off with an all-pro running back as well. And it’s very possible that they’ll improve in the next three years, or perhaps they’ll have Barkley for longer than that. Running backs typically hit the wall earlier than most players, but that doesn’t mean he’s going to be cooked at age 25.

Barkley is considered a generational talent. The Browns strongly considered taking him at #1 despite liking Mayfield. He’s an outlier when it comes to when to draft running backs. I’ve generally been very on board about the devaluation of running backs and also agree that generally it’s the blocking and other players on offense that have more to do with the running game success. But I can also acknowledge an obvious outlier when you’re talking about a guy who is this good.

Just like other elite players, he needs a strong team around him, and if he does get that chance, he could be player that puts the Giants over the top. Many teams have drafted studs but haven’t gotten better despite it. It doesn’t mean the player wasn’t the right pick.

Ice its tough to take you seriously w all due respect. You're too focused on the name & Barkley. Look at what you said ...
"You can really find a similar/better RB like Barkley anywhere? Really? You generally have a very good understanding of talent, so your statement is baffling".

I'm talking abt production. And you absolutely can find similar production elsewhere. This is grade school ****.
Common sense. Look at what Aaron Jones & Austin Ekeler are doing at the position. Both arguably the best offensive players on their teams & I guarantee you didn't know who they were a few years ago. These examples are plentiful & are there throughout decades. Jesus Terrell Davis helped save Elway's legacy as a 6th Rd pick & making plays on ST.

It's the easiest position in the game in terms of transition from college to pros. Is this even up for debate? In fact its even close when you talk abt other positions. Knowing that alone why would you ever take one that high? He's already a top 5-8 cap hit as a rookie. Please go look up how paying big bucks for a RB works out. Almost never good. Barkley hasn't transformed that team & will cost a ton on his 2nd contract. Just not a smart pick all the way around. Forget abt hindsight it was a awful pick at the time but knowing what we know now makes it that much worse.

You really want to argue if they should have taken Jackson, Nelson over Barkley going into 2020? Nelson looks & is playing at an elite level. Legit might be the best G in football. Jackson has brought his team to the playoffs twice & is playing at a MVP level.

The fact that this needs to be explained after you've spent so much in a football forum speaks volumes abt your understanding of the game.

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

Ice its tough to take you seriously w all due respect. You're too focused on the name & Barkley. Look at what you said ...
"You can really find a similar/better RB like Barkley anywhere? Really? You generally have a very good understanding of talent, so your statement is baffling".

I'm talking abt production. And you absolutely can find similar production elsewhere. This is grade school ****.
Common sense. Look at what Aaron Jones & Austin Ekeler are doing at the position. Both arguably the best offensive players on their teams & I guarantee you didn't know who they were a few years ago. These examples are plentiful & are there throughout decades. Jesus Terrell Davis helped save Elway's legacy as a 6th Rd pick & making plays on ST.

It's the easiest position in the game in terms of transition from college to pros. Is this even up for debate? In fact its even close when you talk abt other positions. Knowing that alone why would you ever take one that high? He's already a top 5-8 cap hit as a rookie. Please go look up how paying big bucks for a RB works out. Almost never good. Barkley hasn't transformed that team & will cost a ton on his 2nd contract. Just not a smart pick all the way around. Forget abt hindsight it was a awful pick at the time but knowing what we know now makes it that much worse.

You really want to argue if they should have taken Jackson, Nelson over Barkley going into 2020? Nelson looks & is playing at an elite level. Legit might be the best G in football. Jackson has brought his team to the playoffs twice & is playing at a MVP level.

The fact that this needs to be explained after you've spent so much in a football forum speaks volumes abt your understanding of the game.

You rebutted the idea that Barkley’s production can rather easily be replaced by citing three players - one a complete outlier from 25 years ago - the other two whom no GM in the NFL would take over Barkley and would laugh you out of the room.

I’ve already acknowledged QBs are a different animal and should be judged on wins. Nelson is another blue chip guard who is a great player...at the same time he isn’t exactly capable of carrying a bad team to the playoffs either, along with basically every non-QB.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

You rebutted the idea that Barkley’s production can rather easily be replaced by citing three players - one a complete outlier from 25 years ago - the other two whom no GM in the NFL would take over Barkley and would laugh you out of the room.

I’ve already acknowledged QBs are a different animal and should be judged on wins. Nelson is another blue chip guard who is a great player...at the same time he isn’t exactly capable of carrying a bad team to the playoffs either, along with basically every non-QB.

I'm sorry but again you're post come as a casual fan w very little understanding of the game. Esp how its played today.

3 examples? It's embarrassing you don't already know this.

Seriously, do some light reading to educate yourself.
Why a team should never use a top-20 pick on a RB. Like ever. Seriously

Another piece
First-round backs don’t separate themselves
In any study of the NFL draft, you expect to reach two conclusions if teams are successfully identifying players who will do well in the NFL and making smart picks as a result: You would see that players drafted in higher rounds are more likely to be successful, and that higher picks tend to get more opportunities to play. In most cases, a first-round pick will be given time to prove his worth, while a seventh-round pick is fortunate just to make the team.
Yet when we broke down the numbers for running backs who were drafted between 2002 and 2017 and who actually played in the NFL, we did not find much difference in performance from round to round. No matter when backs were drafted, they posted pretty similar numbers in terms of yards per carry and rushing Defense-Adjusted Value Over Average (an efficiency metric explained here).

 

[Ice_Ice_Brady]

I'm sorry but again you're post come as a casual fan w very little understanding of the game. Esp how its played today.

3 examples? It's embarrassing you don't already know this.

Seriously, do some light reading to educate yourself.
Why a team should never use a top-20 pick on a RB. Like ever. Seriously

Another piece
First-round backs don’t separate themselves
In any study of the NFL draft, you expect to reach two conclusions if teams are successfully identifying players who will do well in the NFL and making smart picks as a result: You would see that players drafted in higher rounds are more likely to be successful, and that higher picks tend to get more opportunities to play. In most cases, a first-round pick will be given time to prove his worth, while a seventh-round pick is fortunate just to make the team.
Yet when we broke down the numbers for running backs who were drafted between 2002 and 2017 and who actually played in the NFL, we did not find much difference in performance from round to round. No matter when backs were drafted, they posted pretty similar numbers in terms of yards per carry and rushing Defense-Adjusted Value Over Average (an efficiency metric explained here).

Fan blogger Ben Baldwin sure is an expert over NFL GMs.

Barkley being an outlier (and proving he’s an outlier) is why everything you’ve said is silly. Or embarrassing, as you like to say in every argument ever.

 

[BaconGrundleCandy]

Fan blogger Ben Baldwin sure is an expert over NFL GMs.

Barkley being an outlier (and proving he’s an outlier) is why everything you’ve said is silly. Or embarrassing, as you like to say in every argument ever.

Pretty lame that's all you got out of it. Who cares abt who wrote it. Its the info & insight that's important. None of that ever shows up in your post so I wouldn't dismiss Ben as "fan blogger".

He makes a hell of a lot more sense than you.

Barkley is an outlier lol? He hasn't even proven himself to be the clear cut RB1 from his class yet but he's an outlier?

Chubb has proven very comparable in terms of stats, is cheaper & was taken in the 2nd Rd. That's exactly how you treat the position.

I was right at the time in terms of priorities. Drafting a RB that high is foolish. We have hindsight now & you're still saying it was the right pick?

 

[fightingirish595]

Hard to argue against BGCs points. They are valid. I disagree with his conclusion though because taking Saquon with the second pick is not why they are a disaster, IMO.

man interesting scenario relevant to this debate would be, how much more than Michel could Saquon have produced last season as a patriot. That would be fairly interesting to see. We will never know though