Saquan Barkley Pick is looking like a bad pick

[scar988]

4 minutes ago, Shanedorf said:

Its not just the bust factor, that happens to all positions as you noted.
Its that you can find a very talented RB later - whereas its really hard to find a talented QB, CB, EDGE, LT later.
There are certainly later round examples of each, but they are more rare.

A couple of top RBs right now are Dalvin Cook ( 2nd) , Alvin Kamara ( 3rd) and Aaron Jones (5th). If you want more of the bruiser type, Derrick Henry ( 2nd)
That's a lot of talent for a much more minimal investment

The RB position is also devalued because of longevity as you noted- which actually helps NFL teams find a talented one later.
And in today's NFL - you have top coaches ( Kyle ) preferring a stable of RBs with different skill sets vs one bell cow as in yesteryear.

That pick was a treasure and the Giants didn't get the most out of their treasure - not because of bad luck -  but because of bad strategy.
I think that's where most fans are sitting as far as Barkley. They paid $ 50 for a $ 20 dollar bill - and that's independent of Saquan.

Starting in 2019, here are the 1st round RBs looking backwards.
The ones in bold are living up to their draft slot and the ones in italics are already on another team before their rookie deal was over

Josh Jacobs
Saquan Barkley
Rashaad Penny
Sony Michel
Leonard Fournette
CMC
Zeke
Todd Gurley
Melvin Gordon
Trent Richardson
Doug Martin

 

Todd Gurley actually didn't go to another team before his rookie deal was over. He signed a massive extension with the Rams before it was done and was rostered by them for 5 years.

[scar988]

Just now, iknowcool said:

You can find a very talented WR later too, if not even more-so especially with how the passing game has evolved.  But yet there isn't as loud of an audience against drafting WRs in the first-round.  

Because an elite WR completely changes your offense. Just look at Julio Jones, AJ Green and Calvin Johnson. They change the offense much more than a RB does.

[Mr Bad Example]

16 minutes ago, Forge said:

That was probably the draft where I knew the Mayock / Gruden thing wouldn't work. Ultimately, I don't know who is making the decisions there, but that relationship wasn't going to work (either because Mayock got fed up or Mayock became a scapegoat for Gruden's antics). Using the #4 overall on a guy that didn't project to the next level as a stud and some people thought would be available at their second pick 20 selections later, another first round pick on a running back and a third, first round pick on a box safety in a passing league just seemed like a horrific use of assets. 

Right. And it wasn't as though consensus was that any of the 3 were bad players, just that Jacobs and Abrams could've most likely been had in the 2nd round and Ferrell was a bottom-half-of-the-first level prospect. 

[Mr Bad Example]

16 minutes ago, NYRaider said:

Essentially every defensive player we drafted was selected because they "fit Paul Guenther's scheme" and are all backups now, lol.

Drafting players because they "fit your scheme" is usually a sign there's bad coaching going on. Talent is the premium, coaches should adjust to talent. 

[Shanedorf]

1 minute ago, iknowcool said:

But yet there isn't as loud of an audience against drafting WRs in the first-round.  

You've obviously never been to the Packers subforum.  ( I don't recommend it)

I think its a fair point that RBs are the butt of too many bad draft takes, but the value proposition is tough to argue with.
I just did the math on Saquon and the other RBs I mentioned above and here's how it shakes out:

The Giants spent 2600 "points" on Saquon, while they could have gotten all 4 of Cook, Kamara, Jones and Henry and still had the equivalent of the 9th pick in the draft to work with. Of course that's unpossible - but it shines a light on why 32 NFL teams have devalued the position - and why that devaluation actually helps find better RBs later.  Which feeds into the Draft-Industrial Complex mantra that "you shouldn't spend a 1st on a RB " 

[TakeTheBallDeep]

Barkley was a fun pick at the time, but I think we all knew deep down it was the wrong play long term

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

28 minutes ago, scar988 said:

Because an elite WR completely changes your offense. Just look at Julio Jones, AJ Green and Calvin Johnson. They change the offense much more than a RB does.

I’m nearly as anti-wr tbh. I personally wouldn’t likely draft one in round one. If you’re talking about one of those guys or a Saquon level talent in the teens or twenties, sure, maybe, but they never last that long so the point is moot.

Even all of the guys you just mentioned don’t really make the point to draft one exceptionally high.  Not a ring amongst them.  

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

I’m not speaking in absolutes of course, but more times than not (like 99% of the time) I’m waiting until day 2/3 for wr or rb.

Late round 1 ups the odds.

[iknowcool]

35 minutes ago, scar988 said:

Because an elite WR completely changes your offense. Just look at Julio Jones, AJ Green and Calvin Johnson. They change the offense much more than a RB does.

How does an elite WR change your offense any more than an elite RB does?

Edited September 24, 2021 by iknowcool

[ET80]

16 minutes ago, TakeTheBallDeep said:

Barkley was a fun pick at the time, but I think we all knew deep down it was the wrong play long term

Oh yeah, I think the total package was absolutely incredible - power, explosiveness, breakaway speed, valid ability in the passing game, high football IQ, high character. He was a specimen in both tangible and intangible traits.

I don't think any of this has gone away, I still think he'll have a great career - but it's not going to be with the Giants, and they're the ones who paid sticker price on him.

[NYRaider]

33 minutes ago, Mr Bad Example said:

Drafting players because they "fit your scheme" is usually a sign there's bad coaching going on. Talent is the premium, coaches should adjust to talent. 

Paul Guenther said Brian Burns was big enough to set the edge in the run game though

[ET80]

10 minutes ago, LETSGOBROWNIES said:

I’m not speaking in absolutes of course, but more times than not (like 99% of the time) I’m waiting until day 2/3 for wr or rb.

Late round 1 ups the odds.

Not that there's an example of this, but my only exception - if I'm a team like KC or TB and I'm a RB away from turning into a perennial powerhouse. I'd consider passing on future draft picks, trading up to a top 10 pick to secure a guy like Saquan/McCaffrey... knowing that every other key spot is filled by an above average player.

Does that make sense? So in essence, teams that could USE a unicorn like Saquan will never be in position to get a guy like Saquan, because they're picking too low. So, go get him with the belief the odds of picking 32 get that much higher with a guy like him in your offense.

Now, these teams could try to find a Dalvin Cook, Derrick Henry, Alvin Kamara - sure. However, the possibility of grabbing a Bishop Sankey or D'Onta Foreman goes up a bit. 

I'm sort of thinking on the fly with this one, thoughts?

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

36 minutes ago, Mr Bad Example said:

Drafting players because they "fit your scheme" is usually a sign there's bad coaching going on. Talent is the premium, coaches should adjust to talent. 

The Seahawks literally created one of the greatest stretches of any franchise ever by drafting guys who fit their scheme.

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

5 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Not that there's an example of this, but my only exception - if I'm a team like KC or TB and I'm a RB away from turning into a perennial powerhouse. I'd consider passing on future draft picks, trading up to a top 10 pick to secure a guy like Saquan/McCaffrey... knowing that every other key spot is filled by an above average player.

Only way I’m trading up like that is for a QB.  Otherwise it’s stay put or trade down.  Gimme all the picks tbh.

5 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Does that make sense? So in essence, teams that could USE a unicorn like Saquan will never be in position to get a guy like Saquan, because they're picking too low. So, go get him with the belief the odds of picking 32 get that much higher with a guy like him in your offense.

I personally think that same team would be better trading down and spending multiple picks on running backs day 2.

5 minutes ago, ET80 said:

Now, these teams could try to find a Dalvin Cook, Derrick Henry, Alvin Kamara - sure. However, the possibility of grabbing a Bishop Sankey or D'Onta Foreman goes up a bit. 

I'm sort of thinking on the fly with this one, thoughts?

I wouldn’t go looking for a bell cow back, I’d collect solid talent and hope to develop or luck into a stud.

[AFlaccoSeagulls]

Picking a RB in the 1st round, let alone in the top 5, LET ALONE WITH THE SECOND OVERALL PICK is just horrible in today's NFL.