Reassessing the RB Draft at the 11th Hour

[AZBearsFan]

With this draft season having been incredibly unique with us knowing we won’t have a pick until 87 barring a trade up, probably the most frustrating part to me has been that with basically every draft simulation I run whether it’s on TDN or Fanspeak with basically any big board option they have, all of them seem to think way more RBs will be available at 87 than most of us do. Jacobs is always gone, but half the time Sanders is there, same with Henderson, and almost always Montgomery and Harris are there. 

On one hand that just doesn’t feel realistic, but on the other hand I can make a legitimate case for why the teams that don’t take early RBs in those sims went with other guys too. So is it that we are overvaluing these guys because it’s where a great deal of our focus has been the past 4 months (or more)? Are we too willing to look past Sanders’ fumbling issues in 2017 and Montgomery’s lack of top speed or Harris’ lack of any one elite trait or Henderson’s level of competition because of the perceived need? Are analysts undervaluing them because of the positional devaluation or because most analysts are seemingly giving top 64 grades to like 115 guys? Or is need trumping talent elsewhere? 

I have been legitimately perplexed and maybe even annoyed by this for weeks so I went searching for answers. Looking over the league rosters only TB and OAK are teams have situations where I’d say they NEED an immediate RB upgrade. That’s it. That next tier of RB needy teams are situations with adequate starters in place but that those starters are not clearly long term guys at the position or guys are there who could be but that’s TBD. To me that’s us, PHI, BUF, HOU, and KC. Everyone else is either set with a stud RB already as RB1 or has already acquired that next guy. BUF has McCoy, Gore and now Yeldon so at least in terms of 2019 they’re totally fine. PHI has Howard, Adams, Clement and Smallwood plus maybe Sproles so they have bigger needs too. HOU is set at starter with Miller for 2019 and really should focus on keeping Watson from getting killed early in the draft. KC just gave Damian Williams starter money and they need to replace both Houston and Ford. I thought about putting GB here too but then saw that Aaron Jones averaged 5.5 ypc over 133 carries last year after averaging 5.5 ypc over 81 carries in 2017 and figure RB is probably down the list for them as well.

Teams will always say they don’t draft for need, but really they usually draft for need within common grades. In that regard, perhaps it IS entirely reasonable that those top RBs in this class will fall. Hard to tell if that’s a happy accident or if Pace planned it this way last year, but it stands to reason that we may very well get GREAT value on a plug and play starter type at RB at 87. 

[dll2000]

Funny that you wrote this just as I was making a very similar post in another thread.  People keep saying no way this guy or that guy will be there in 3rd or 4th.   I think if you crunch numbers, look at depth of class, factor in continued devaluation of position and current lack of team need league wide at position you will see there will be plenty of choices in 3rd or 4th.

Draft simulators aren't accurate, but neither are mocks they are based on.  They still give you an idea of what position groups have depth and can be found in later rounds.  RB is definitely one of those positions.  

But depth of similar draft grades doesn't mean they will all be successful.  They almost certainly won't be.  You still have to find right one. 

[WindyCity]

I have set areas where I would be happy with certain backs and I will be happy with the value that they offer at these spots.

56-Henderson, Sanders, Jacobs

*56 is as high as I think we could reasonably move for "our guy"

87-T Williams, Montgomery, Hill, Harris

126-Ozigbo, Armstead, D Williams, Singletary

162-Weber, Anderson

[dll2000]

3 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

I have set areas where I would be happy with certain backs and I will be happy with the value that they offer at these spots.

56-Henderson, Sanders, Jacobs

*56 is as high as I think we could reasonably move for "our guy"

87-T Williams, Montgomery, Hill, Harris

126-Ozigbo, Armstead, D Williams, Singletary

162-Weber, Anderson

A trade up by Pace would shock me.  A trade down would not.  I think trade would happen at 87 if at all. 

[WindyCity]

52 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

A trade up by Pace would shock me.  A trade down would not.  I think trade would happen at 87 if at all. 

I would not be shocked at all.

He has been very aggressive in securing his guy and the Bears have a roster that might have the fewest needs in the NFL.

[dll2000]

1 hour ago, WindyCity said:

I would not be shocked at all.

He has been very aggressive in securing his guy and the Bears have a roster that might have the fewest needs in the NFL.

I think he wants all picks he can get at this point.  A trade up would have to be someone who dropped far below what he expected.

[WindyCity]

24 minutes ago, dll2000 said:

I think he wants all picks he can get at this point.  A trade up would have to be someone who dropped far below what he expected.

We are drafting deep backups at spots other than TE and RB, I am not sure how married to his picks he is going to be.

[abstract_thought]

In the past 5 drafts we've seen 8, 6, 3, 7, and 5 backs drafted before pick 87. If that rate continues, the best available will be something like Hill, Singletary, Williams, and Ozigbo.

Fans and analysts tend to overstate the devaluation of the position. RBs are still being drafted in large quantities.

[dll2000]

18 minutes ago, WindyCity said:

We are drafting deep backups at spots other than TE and RB, I am not sure how married to his picks he is going to be.

Pretty married I would say when he is starting in 3rd.

We'll see though.  Anything is possible.  If I was gambling I would say no trade up.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[SLCbear]

7 hours ago, AZBearsFan said:

With this draft season having been incredibly unique with us knowing we won’t have a pick until 87 barring a trade up, probably the most frustrating part to me has been that with basically every draft simulation I run whether it’s on TDN or Fanspeak with basically any big board option they have, all of them seem to think way more RBs will be available at 87 than most of us do. Jacobs is always gone, but half the time Sanders is there, same with Henderson, and almost always Montgomery and Harris are there. 

On one hand that just doesn’t feel realistic, but on the other hand I can make a legitimate case for why the teams that don’t take early RBs in those sims went with other guys too. So is it that we are overvaluing these guys because it’s where a great deal of our focus has been the past 4 months (or more)? Are we too willing to look past Sanders’ fumbling issues in 2017 and Montgomery’s lack of top speed or Harris’ lack of any one elite trait or Henderson’s level of competition because of the perceived need? Are analysts undervaluing them because of the positional devaluation or because most analysts are seemingly giving top 64 grades to like 115 guys? Or is need trumping talent elsewhere? 

I have been legitimately perplexed and maybe even annoyed by this for weeks so I went searching for answers. Looking over the league rosters only TB and OAK are teams have situations where I’d say they NEED an immediate RB upgrade. That’s it. That next tier of RB needy teams are situations with adequate starters in place but that those starters are not clearly long term guys at the position or guys are there who could be but that’s TBD. To me that’s us, PHI, BUF, HOU, and KC. Everyone else is either set with a stud RB already as RB1 or has already acquired that next guy. BUF has McCoy, Gore and now Yeldon so at least in terms of 2019 they’re totally fine. PHI has Howard, Adams, Clement and Smallwood plus maybe Sproles so they have bigger needs too. HOU is set at starter with Miller for 2019 and really should focus on keeping Watson from getting killed early in the draft. KC just gave Damian Williams starter money and they need to replace both Houston and Ford. I thought about putting GB here too but then saw that Aaron Jones averaged 5.5 ypc over 133 carries last year after averaging 5.5 ypc over 81 carries in 2017 and figure RB is probably down the list for them as well.

Teams will always say they don’t draft for need, but really they usually draft for need within common grades. In that regard, perhaps it IS entirely reasonable that those top RBs in this class will fall. Hard to tell if that’s a happy accident or if Pace planned it this way last year, but it stands to reason that we may very well get GREAT value on a plug and play starter type at RB at 87. 

I think you are onto something here ..  the problem for us, and I stated  this in another post several weeks ago,  everybody thinks we are looking hard at drafting a RB ...   there is going to be a run on RBs, and it will most likely happen before pick 87. This draft reminds me so much of Morgan Burnett draft. Fudgies trade up swoop in knowing we're likely going to draft    ... teams probably feel they need to get their guy prior to Bears 1st pick .... but as you pointed out there are few very few team with RB needs 

 Pace has his favorite RB prospect identified. Will he have to move up or will he take a  3rd/4th-tier (perceived) prospect  who was his guy all along ... Will be interesting  !

3 more days !!!

 

[HuskieBear]

not sure if this would happen, but with word that Robbie requested a trade...

SF - 4th (104) and Robbie

Chi - 3rd (87)

SF moves up ~ 20 spots, Chi drops to an area that they likely are still able to grab a RB they like. would you do it?

 

 

[Epyon]

2 hours ago, HuskieBear said:

not sure if this would happen, but with word that Robbie requested a trade...

SF - 4th (104) and Robbie

Chi - 3rd (87)

SF moves up ~ 20 spots, Chi drops to an area that they likely are still able to grab a RB they like. would you do it?

 

 

No.

Gould was good, but I'm not paying anything resembling serious capital to get him.

Let him sit out and punish the 9ers for being idiots and tagging him.... I don't see why we should have to fork over our draft capital because THEY made the mistake of tagging a player who wants nothing to do with them.

I'd add, that he's older and there's no garuntee that his kicking issues here have resolved.... Our weather isn't exactly San Fransisco's.  I'd love to bring him back home, but I'm also rather over it vs drafting someone who's hopefully going to be a long term answer, like the Gay dude, especially when one of them costs a 6th or 7th and almost no $$ per year, and the other is potentially costing us millions and a mid round pick.

Edited April 23, 2019 by Epyon

[Sugashane]

I'm of the thinking he k owe this team is too talented to keep. Eventually he is going to have to pay Tru, Jackson, Smith, and Whitehair. Daniels and Nichols look line they could be earning serious pay too, etc. 

 

To me he should be drafting BPA because there will be people leaving, especially if he does retain Floyd. We need to keep sticking the shelves, so unless he really thinks that someone is WAY better than another I am not looking at a trade up for a RB in this draft. Pace also has shown he will make the moves he thinks are best, regardless of national consensus. I wouldn't be surprised if Davis gets way more  carries than most of use expect. 

[abstract_thought]

27 minutes ago, Sugashane said:

I'm of the thinking he k owe this team is too talented to keep. Eventually he is going to have to pay Tru, Jackson, Smith, and Whitehair. Daniels and Nichols look line they could be earning serious pay too, etc. 

 

To me he should be drafting BPA because there will be people leaving, especially if he does retain Floyd. We need to keep sticking the shelves, so unless he really thinks that someone is WAY better than another I am not looking at a trade up for a RB in this draft. Pace also has shown he will make the moves he thinks are best, regardless of national consensus. I wouldn't be surprised if Davis gets way more  carries than most of use expect. 

This.

The Bears are a good team now. The focus isn't on addressing needs for this season, it's about making sure they stay good for a long time.

[soulman]

7 hours ago, Epyon said:

No.

Gould was good, but I'm not paying anything resembling serious capital to get him.

Let him sit out and punish the 9ers for being idiots and tagging him.... I don't see why we should have to fork over our draft capital because THEY made the mistake of tagging a player who wants nothing to do with them.

I'd add, that he's older and there's no garuntee that his kicking issues here have resolved.... Our weather isn't exactly San Fransisco's.  I'd love to bring him back home, but I'm also rather over it vs drafting someone who's hopefully going to be a long term answer, like the Gay dude, especially when one of them costs a 6th or 7th and almost no $$ per year, and the other is potentially costing us millions and a mid round pick.

You wouldn't swap picks from #87 to #97 to land Robbie Gould?

 

9 hours ago, HuskieBear said:

not sure if this would happen, but with word that Robbie requested a trade...

SF - 4th (104) and Robbie

Chi - 3rd (87)

SF moves up ~ 20 spots, Chi drops to an area that they likely are still able to grab a RB they like. would you do it?

 

 

SF's 4th round pick is #97 isn't it?  That's only a 10 place drop worth about 40 points.  And hell yes I'd do it.

Edited April 24, 2019 by soulman