The Bears offseason

[Tim]

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't studied football like I have baseball. I tend to watch football just for the fun of it rather than getting at all the details. If you take out Peterson, how much does RB success correlate from one year to the next? It seems that for every non-AP back in the league, there's a huge amount of year to year variance in their results.

[jersey cubs fan]

Trade Slausson for a 4th rounder as has been rumoured. I'd be happy.

 

That has been rumored?

[WrigleyField 22]

Trade Slausson for a 4th rounder as has been rumoured. I'd be happy.

 

That has been rumored?

Yea apparently Gase has offered up the Dolphins 4th. Or discussed the idea at a high level. Of course there's rumors they want to move back up in the top 10, which probably won't both happen.

[David]

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't studied football like I have baseball. I tend to watch football just for the fun of it rather than getting at all the details. If you take out Peterson, how much does RB success correlate from one year to the next? It seems that for every non-AP back in the league, there's a huge amount of year to year variance in their results.

 

Yeah. To me, for the most part, you get a guy who is NFL caliber and you hand him the ball and stuff happens and mostly success depends on the scheme and blocking and complimentary talent, with some being a bit better than others.

[WrigleyField 22]

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't studied football like I have baseball. I tend to watch football just for the fun of it rather than getting at all the details. If you take out Peterson, how much does RB success correlate from one year to the next? It seems that for every non-AP back in the league, there's a huge amount of year to year variance in their results.

 

Yeah. To me, for the most part, you get a guy who is NFL caliber and you hand him the ball and stuff happens and mostly success depends on the scheme and blocking and complimentary talent, with some being a bit better than others.

Which could probably be said of every position outside of QB. And yet some players at every position transcend scheme.

[David]

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't studied football like I have baseball. I tend to watch football just for the fun of it rather than getting at all the details. If you take out Peterson, how much does RB success correlate from one year to the next? It seems that for every non-AP back in the league, there's a huge amount of year to year variance in their results.

 

Yeah. To me, for the most part, you get a guy who is NFL caliber and you hand him the ball and stuff happens and mostly success depends on the scheme and blocking and complimentary talent, with some being a bit better than others.

Which could probably be said of every position outside of QB. And yet some players at every position transcend scheme.

 

I just think that is less the case at RB. I'm not denying it exists. I just think the gap between those transcendent guys and the other guys isn't as wide in the actual impact on winning and producing (or preventing) points.

 

And yeah, like you mentioned, shelf life.

[jersey cubs fan]

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't studied football like I have baseball. I tend to watch football just for the fun of it rather than getting at all the details. If you take out Peterson, how much does RB success correlate from one year to the next? It seems that for every non-AP back in the league, there's a huge amount of year to year variance in their results.

Well, you've had Peterson, Forte, Gore and Williams all being some sort of useful to excellent into their 30s. Marshawn Lynch had 8 badass seasons, after being drafted 12th. Jamaal Charles has basically lost two seasons to injury in his 8 seasons in the NFL, but has been badass when healthy. There are very good running backs that last more than 3-4 years.

 

 

For years running backs were over drafted. You can find useful ones later in the draft. And there has since been what I consider an over correction in how teams draft RB. But the top of the draft is littered with busts from every position, a lot that people simply forget if they weren't QB or RB. And you can and should consider taking the best RB at 11.

[WrigleyField 22]

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't studied football like I have baseball. I tend to watch football just for the fun of it rather than getting at all the details. If you take out Peterson, how much does RB success correlate from one year to the next? It seems that for every non-AP back in the league, there's a huge amount of year to year variance in their results.

Well, you've had Peterson, Forte, Gore and Williams all being some sort of useful to excellent into their 30s. Marshawn Lynch had 8 badass seasons, after being drafted 12th. Jamaal Charles has basically lost two seasons to injury in his 8 seasons in the NFL, but has been badass when healthy. There are very good running backs that last more than 3-4 years.

 

 

For years running backs were over drafted. You can find useful ones later in the draft. And there has since been what I consider an over correction in how teams draft RB. But the top of the draft is littered with busts from every position, a lot that people simply forget if they weren't QB or RB. And you can and should consider taking the best RB at 11.

Yea I think overcorrection is the right way to look at it. There were just a couple weak RB classes in a row during the same time that teams were correcting the RB valuation and suddenly "no first round RB ever" became a thing. But really a lot of the top backs during that time were among the top rated in their respective classes, they were just going in the second or third round, meanwhile out producing many first round busts at DE, CB, QB, etc.

[WrigleyField 22]

Looking at the past 7 years or so, it's mostly just a bunch of RB busts from Alabama in the first round. Non Alabama RB in the first are probably out performing many other positions like DE or CB.

 

So don't draft Henry.

 

2007 had AP, and 2008 had a ton of the rest of the good RB over the past few years, all before pick 73. 2009-2015, most good backs came from round 1 or 2. Just stay away from the Bama guys, they can't handle running behind a worse line and better competetion.

[Tim]

I'll be the first to admit that I haven't studied football like I have baseball. I tend to watch football just for the fun of it rather than getting at all the details. If you take out Peterson, how much does RB success correlate from one year to the next? It seems that for every non-AP back in the league, there's a huge amount of year to year variance in their results.

Well, you've had Peterson, Forte, Gore and Williams all being some sort of useful to excellent into their 30s. Marshawn Lynch had 8 badass seasons, after being drafted 12th. Jamaal Charles has basically lost two seasons to injury in his 8 seasons in the NFL, but has been badass when healthy. There are very good running backs that last more than 3-4 years.

 

 

For years running backs were over drafted. You can find useful ones later in the draft. And there has since been what I consider an over correction in how teams draft RB. But the top of the draft is littered with busts from every position, a lot that people simply forget if they weren't QB or RB. And you can and should consider taking the best RB at 11.

That's not quite the question I asked, though. Sure, you're going to have some survivors who had success. But let's limit this down to the backs that are taken near the top of the draft as those will be the guys rated most similarly to Elliot.

 

(Summary of all that comes below in case people don't want to read the whole long ass post: I'm not inspired by the RB history at the top of the draft since 2000)

 

2000:

 

1 5 Jamal Lewis RB Tennessee Baltimore Ravens

1 7 Thomas Jones RB Virginia Arizona Cardinals

1 11 Ron Dayne RB Wisconsin New York Giants

1 19 Shaun Alexander RB Alabama Seattle Seahawks

 

Lewis was a good investment for the Ravens as he put up three good seasons to start his career there, but played zero games in his second season and collapsed after his 387 carries in his fourth season.

 

Thomas Jones stuck around for a long time, but was never really an impact guy. He had a couple nice seasons with his each of the Bears and Jets, but those were his third and fourth teams. Terrible return for the Cards on their draft pick.

 

Dayne sucked. Hard.

 

It took Alexander to his fifth season to really become an impact player, but he was pretty good up to that point, too.

 

 

2001:

 

1 5 LaDainian Tomlinson RB Texas Christian San Diego Chargers

1 23 Deuce McAllister RB Mississippi New Orleans Saints

1 27 Michael Bennett RB Wisconsin Minnesota Vikings

 

LT was the only guy in this draft rated close to Elliot right now. I'd say that one worked out okay for the Chargers.

 

 

2002:

 

1 16 William Green RB Boston College Cleveland Browns

1 18 T.J. Duckett RB Michigan State Atlanta Falcons

 

An uninspiring year for RB's. Both had lousy careers and were horrible picks.

 

 

2003:

 

1 23 Willis McGahee RB Miami (Fla.) Buffalo Bills

1 27 Larry Johnson RB Penn State Kansas City Chiefs

 

McGahee was talented, but inconsistent. It was a gamble by the bills to take him with his injury history and he never became the difference maker they hoped he would be when he got on the field.

 

Johnson didn't get many carries his first two years, but did well when he got the ball. Then he was a stud for two years. Then was never the same. Not sure how to rate that return for a first round pick.

 

 

2004:

 

1 24 Steven Jackson RB Oregon State St. Louis Rams

1 26 Chris Perry RB Michigan Cincinnati Bengals

1 30 Kevin Jones RB Virginia Tech Detroit Lions

 

Jackson was a huge two way threat from the backfield for years. One of the more successful picks in the whole list.

 

Perry sucked hard. Jones was not worth even a late first rounder

 

 

2005:

 

1 2 Ronnie Brown RB Auburn Miami Dolphins

1 4 Cedric Benson RB Texas Chicago Bears

1 5 Cadillac Williams RB Auburn Tampa Bay Buccaneers

 

Ah...THE running back draft. Three top five picks. The returns for the drafting teams ranged from horrible to less than inspiring.

 

 

2006:

 

1 2 Reggie Bush RB USC New Orleans Saints

1 21 Laurence Maroney RB Minnesota New England Patriots

1 27 DeAngelo Williams RB Memphis Carolina Panthers

 

Bush had his moments, but it's hard to justify his impact at #2. Not the worst pick in the list, though, even considering slot.

 

Maroney was a guy. Could have had his equal in the third.

 

Williams had a strong YPC, but didn't get the carries most years. He had one really good year (his third) and one other 1000+ yd year. Not the worst pick for the end of the first, but not comparable to burning a pick at 11.

 

 

2007:

 

1 7 Adrian Peterson RB Oklahoma Minnesota Vikings

1 12 Marshawn Lynch RB California Buffalo Bills

 

I think both teams say they are extremely pleased with these picks.

 

 

2008:

 

1 4 Darren McFadden RB Arkansas Oakland Raiders

1 13 Jonathan Stewart RB Oregon Carolina Panthers

1 22 Felix Jones RB Arkansas Dallas Cowboys

1 23 Rashard Mendenhall RB Illinois Pittsburgh Steelers

1 24 Chris Johnson RB East Carolina Tennessee Titans

 

McFadden was a bust at #4.

Last year was the first time in his career Stewart started more than 8 games.

Felix Jones never even got that one season with more than 8 starts.

Mendenhall could have been good had he stayed in one piece. We'll never know.

Chris Johnson was certainly worth the pick at 24, but doesn't do much to prove the consistency of running backs.

 

 

2009:

 

1 12 Knowshon Moreno RB Georgia Denver Broncos

1 27 Donald Brown RB Connecticut Indianapolis Colts

1 31 Beanie Wells RB Ohio State Arizona Cardinals

 

blech

 

 

2010:

 

1 9 C.J. Spiller RB Clemson Buffalo Bills

1 12 Ryan Mathews RB Fresno State San Diego Chargers

 

Each guy had moments, but nothing you couldn't get from a 3rd-4th round guy

 

 

2011:

 

1 28 Mark Ingram RB Alabama New Orleans Saints

2 38 Ryan Williams RB Virginia Tech Arizona Cardinals

 

Uninspiring year for RB's led to uninspiring results.

 

 

2012:

 

1 3 Trent Richardson RB Alabama Cleveland Browns

1 31 Doug Martin RB Boise State Tampa Bay Buccaneers

1 32 David Wilson RB Virginia Tech New York Giants

 

Yeah, Cleveland would like a do over on that pick. But they also want a do over on most all of their picks.

Martin had a nice rookie year. Then sucked, then sucked, then had a nice fourth year. Meh.

I was wondering why I couldn't remember David Wilson. Then I looked him up. Then I understood.

 

 

2013:

 

2 37 Giovani Bernard RB North Carolina Cincinnati Bengals

2 48 Le'Veon Bell RB Michigan State Pittsburgh Steelers

2 58 Montee Ball RB Wisconsin Denver Broncos

 

A very meh year for RB's combined with the growing fear of taking RB's in the first. Le'Veon had a nice season for Pitt in his second year. I'm learning from this exercise to just pretend that Wisconsin doesn't have running backs if I'm planning a team's draft.

 

 

2014:

 

2 54 Bishop Sankey RB Washington Tennessee Titans

2 55 Jeremy Hill RB LSU Cincinnati Bengals

2 57 Carlos Hyde RB Ohio State San Francisco 49ers

 

At least these teams didn't blow first rounders?

 

 

2015:

 

1 10 Todd Gurley RB Georgia St. Louis Rams

1 15 Melvin Gordon RB Wisconsin San Diego Chargers

 

Gurley looks like the first stud RB in the first round in ages. Gordon? Didn't we learn about Wisconsin running backs already?

[WrigleyField 22]

Now do that for every position and also for the rest of the draft rounds.

 

Also, yea add Wisconsin to the list with Bama.

[jersey cubs fan]

Each guy had moments, but nothing you couldn't get from a 3rd-4th round guy

 

This about sums up the anti-RB argument and is just meaningless.

 

Sure, you can find it in a 3rd - 4th round guy. You can find a Hall of Fame QB in the 6th and HOF defensive end in the 8th if it still existed. You can find pro bowl qbs in grocery store aisles as well.

 

It's not about whether or not you can theoretically get the same production later. Your list is an argument against taking multiple RBs in the first round every year. It's not an argument against a RB being worthy of the 11th pick of the draft.

[Tim]

Now do that for every position and also for the rest of the draft rounds.

 

Also, yea add Wisconsin to the list with Bama.

I would, but my lunch hour is over!

[Tim]

It's not about whether or not you can theoretically get the same production later. Your list is an argument against taking multiple RBs in the first round every year. It's not an argument against a RB being worthy of the 11th pick of the draft.

Just looking at the top 15 picks on that list...I'd say they went about 5 for 17 in being worth it if you assume Gurley will hold together. That's...not good.

[WrigleyField 22]

Each guy had moments, but nothing you couldn't get from a 3rd-4th round guy

 

This about sums up the anti-RB argument and is just meaningless.

 

Sure, you can find it in a 3rd - 4th round guy. You can find a Hall of Fame QB in the 6th and HOF defensive end in the 8th if it still existed. You can find pro bowl qbs in grocery store aisles as well.

 

It's not about whether or not you can theoretically get the same production later. Your list is an argument against taking multiple RBs in the first round every year. It's not an argument against a RB being worthy of the 11th pick of the draft.

The only real RB of impact I could find the past several years past Rd 3 is Freeman, who's done it for a year, and an undrafted Foster who ended up in a great RB system. Few other flash in the pan guys who did it for a year or two at best.

 

RB is probably closer to QB than other positions where you have to draft high if you want a good player, Tom Bradys and Arian Fosters and Jamarcus Russels and Trent Richardsons, notwithstanding.

[minnesotacubsfan]

It's not about whether or not you can theoretically get the same production later. Your list is an argument against taking multiple RBs in the first round every year. It's not an argument against a RB being worthy of the 11th pick of the draft.

Just looking at the top 15 picks on that list...I'd say they went about 5 for 17 in being worth it if you assume Gurley will hold together. That's...not good.

 

 

Compare that with QB or LT and it will look like a much wiser gamble I bet

[SpongeWorthy]

Kevin white will dominate

[Guest]

Each guy had moments, but nothing you couldn't get from a 3rd-4th round guy

 

This about sums up the anti-RB argument and is just meaningless.

 

Sure, you can find it in a 3rd - 4th round guy. You can find a Hall of Fame QB in the 6th and HOF defensive end in the 8th if it still existed. You can find pro bowl qbs in grocery store aisles as well.

 

It's not about whether or not you can theoretically get the same production later. Your list is an argument against taking multiple RBs in the first round every year. It's not an argument against a RB being worthy of the 11th pick of the draft.

 

You should never pick a running back that high because you should always have a 3-man committee unless you have Adrian Peterson.

[raw]

I would really hate drafting a RB in the first round. I just don't like it.

 

Agree. Too easy to find RB's later on.

the only reason he would even be close to available for the Bears at 11 is because of the anti-RB in the first round sentiment. But a truly elite RB is absolutely worthy of the pick. Getting the best RB in the draft at 11 could be much better than getting the 4th linebacker.

 

 

I think it would be a great use of resources and excellent value to get Elliot at 11. I wouldn't trade up to get him, but this team needs help on offense and they need dynamic players. The likelihood of getting a truly impactful defensive player at 11 seems very low. But if you can get the best skill position player in the draft at 11. Boy howdy, that's good pickin.

 

This is how I feel. The Bears did find 2 solid starters and possible building blocks on D in the 2nd and 5th rounds last year. In a deep defensive draft, they'd still have 3 other top 106 picks to presumably get difference makers, and no reason they can't get really good starters in the 2nd and 3rd on D. A potential top 5 RB in the league added to a top 5-7 WR in the league and the #7 overall pick in last year's draft has the makings of an elite offense.

 

If Elliott is on the board at 11, he's likely going to be the BPA. And the Bears would likely be selecting him over players on D who have more question marks (Rankins- is he a fit?, Floyd- too small?, Lawson- dynamic enough?, Jackson III- reach?).

[Butterscup]

yeah my mindset is there are players i'd probably rather have than elliott, but if he's there at 11 and they take him, i'm going to be pretty excited for it.

 

edit: i guess when i say "players i'd probably rather have than elliott" i actually mean "positions i'd probably rather have than RB." but if elliott's there, i want him.

[raw]

i just think there's like 1 RB in football who is a real difference maker to the point that he's that much better than the guys who you could otherwise have play there. It's not a thing worth chasing.

 

Eh, I mean I guess that's true. But Marshawn Lynch is only a year away from being a real difference maker and taking a team (along with defense and a QB that didn't make mistakes) to a Superbowl, and probably would have won it for the 2nd year in a row if he got the ball. And there's plenty of very good players out there like McCoy, Le'Veon Bell, Jamaal Charles who are all around players who have been major parts of playoff offenses, 2 of them did so without much QB help.

[CaliforniaRaisin]

That's a weird reason. That's why you pick a guy in the third round, not the first round.

 

The persuasion should be that he has as good a chance as anyone in the past 9 years to be the next Adrian Peterson.

I guess I haven't paid enough attention - is he really rated that highly?

Depends on the evaluator obviously, but he is at least on par with Gurley who looks to have been worth his slot last year. So I'm not saying he was the prospect AP was, but he's the next best thing.

 

Everything I've read says Gurley is a notch better than Elliott.

[KingCubsFan]

Each guy had moments, but nothing you couldn't get from a 3rd-4th round guy

 

This about sums up the anti-RB argument and is just meaningless.

 

Sure, you can find it in a 3rd - 4th round guy. You can find a Hall of Fame QB in the 6th and HOF defensive end in the 8th if it still existed. You can find pro bowl qbs in grocery store aisles as well.

 

It's not about whether or not you can theoretically get the same production later. Your list is an argument against taking multiple RBs in the first round every year. It's not an argument against a RB being worthy of the 11th pick of the draft.

I can't find it, but there was a recent article finding that RBs aren't that much different than every other position in that the elite are typically found in the first round and there's not a lot of value in RBs taken in the middle rounds (although there's value in the 6/7 round and UDFA).

[Chocolate Milk]

I'd be pretty happy with Elliot but I doubt he is available at #11.

[sneakypower]

PFF: Ezekiel Elliott was able to complete the perfect pass blocking season as a running back. He didn’t allow a sack, hit or even a hurry on 103 pass blocking snaps.