NFL News & Notes

[Toddfather]

5 minutes ago, Leader said:

Anybody think they'll select anybody but the Jets?

 

Oh, It's definitely going to be the Jets...

[thrILL!]

I used to really enjoy Hard Knocks but tbh I haven't watched it in a few years.  We're so inundated with NFL coverage that I guess it's not as special as it used to be.  I'd watch it if GB were involved but I don't expect that to happen.

[Deps]

8 hours ago, Old Guy said:

This is a great idea, but you can even lower that to drafting a running back every year from the 5th round on. Also, you still need 50% of them to hit because of the injuries RBs always seem to sustain. 

It's a great theory and one that makes sense. I'll bet we are looking back at the 2023 draft and laughing at Atlanta and Detroit. Which will make this draft no different than most for those organizations. Detroit has done some good lately but see where it takes them after the way they bungled the first round this year. 

It sounds good in theory with Aaron Jones being great and Allgeier and Pacheco contributing last year, but unless that becomes the new normal, you’re likely going to have to cover having a bottom five running back room.

Since 2010, Jones is clearly the best drafted in round five or later. After that, though, it drops to Latavius Murray, Alfred Morris, Jordan Howard, Chris Carson, Dion Lewis, James Starks, etc. There might average out to be one guy in that tier per year.

[AlexGreen#20]

16 minutes ago, Deps said:

It sounds good in theory with Aaron Jones being great and Allgeier and Pacheco contributing last year, but unless that becomes the new normal, you’re likely going to have to cover having a bottom five running back room.

Since 2010, Jones is clearly the best drafted in round five or later. After that, though, it drops to Latavius Murray, Alfred Morris, Jordan Howard, Chris Carson, Dion Lewis, James Starks, etc. There might average out to be one guy in that tier per year.

I can't think of anything less detrimental to winning games in the NFL than having a bottom five running back room. 

[ThatJerkDave]

8 hours ago, Old Guy said:

This is a great idea, but you can even lower that to drafting a running back every year from the 5th round on. Also, you still need 50% of them to hit because of the injuries RBs always seem to sustain. 

It's a great theory and one that makes sense. I'll bet we are looking back at the 2023 draft and laughing at Atlanta and Detroit. Which will make this draft no different than most for those organizations. Detroit has done some good lately but see where it takes them after the way they bungled the first round this year. 

Re-thinking, it really depends on what we are calling a "hit" at RB.  I was only looking for a player that could be functional, if given starting snaps.  From this draft, Roschon Johnson and Isreal Abanikanda were both mid round picks, that if you have a good line, and give them the volume of carries, should be fine.  And once in a while, you get an Aaron Jones out of the deal.  

[Old Guy]

4 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

Re-thinking, it really depends on what we are calling a "hit" at RB.  I was only looking for a player that could be functional, if given starting snaps.  From this draft, Roschon Johnson and Isreal Abanikanda were both mid round picks, that if you have a good line, and give them the volume of carries, should be fine.  And once in a while, you get an Aaron Jones out of the deal.  

I'm more into RB by committee than a bell cow. You can put together a room of guys who specialize for all I care. I'm not worried about any home run threat or top guy like a Derrick Henry. 

To your point, put a strong O-line and good QB with solid WRs, supreme talent at RB is not a necessity. Dependable with good ball security and not a liability in pass pro works for me. Put your resources elsewhere. 

I'm 100% on board with your suggestion. Let's see how the kid we got in round 7 from CMU works out. Dillon and or Jones are gone after this year. 

Edited June 5 by Old Guy

[Deps]

21 minutes ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

I can't think of anything less detrimental to winning games in the NFL than having a bottom five running back room. 

And that’s fine. I was just pointing out that quantity wasn’t necessarily going to equal quality.

[Mr Bad Example]

1 hour ago, AlexGreen#20 said:

I can't think of anything less detrimental to winning games in the NFL than having a bottom five running back room. 

I am loving the fact that this post is coming from someone with the screen name "Alex Green"

[ThatJerkDave]

14 hours ago, Mr Bad Example said:

I am loving the fact that this post is coming from someone with the screen name "Alex Green"

That is the reason that you keep churning the RBs.  Once in a great while, you find a star.  Some of them are really bad.  A lot of them will be just fine, again, given you have the rest of the line-up situated.  RB is a lot about style fit with the team.  If you can identify players that should work in your run system, you could keep churning through them and never pay a second contract, which allows for an expensive LT, or TE, or S, instead of an Aaron Jones cap hit of 15 million or whatever it was.

[AlexGreen#20]

16 hours ago, Deps said:

And that’s fine. I was just pointing out that quantity wasn’t necessarily going to equal quality.

No, quantity doesn't equal quality. 

An elite OL equates to quality. 

[Green19]

 

[Refugee]

5 minutes ago, Green19 said:

 

Man, people have way too much time on their hands, but this was hilarious. 

[ThatJerkDave]

16 hours ago, Deps said:

And that’s fine. I was just pointing out that quantity wasn’t necessarily going to equal quality.

But do you think that you couldn't find a fit at least one time in four years?  My original suggestion was to take a mid round pick swing on a RB every year.  So you always have 3 or 4, 20-27 year old RBs, and none of them make much of anything.  For example, Israel Abanikanda has a 4 year 4.2 million dollar contract.  In 2026, he will be 24 years old and have a cap hit of 1.2 million.  

Of course, not every one of the picks is going to work out, whether it is injuries or work ethic, or simply not talented enough.  But that is why you constantly add to the group, and keep it cheap.

If I had used this strategy since 2019 (I take the first RB selected starting with the 4th round) my RB room looks like:

2019: Justice Hill  https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HillJu00.htm

2020: Joshua Kelley https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/K/KellJo01.htm

2021:  Michael Carter https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CartMi03.htm

2022:  Dameon Pierce https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PierDa01.htm

and in 2023, I replace Hill with Roschon Johnson.

 

I didn't pick and choose with hindsight, I just took the first RB from the fourth round.  Obviously draft order changes, but I just wanted an unbiased sample.  I think Pierce illustrates the point the best, if you give the RB the carries, he will produce.  But I think with a good supporting cast, this group of RBs is more than good enough.  And that RB room (all 5) are ~5.8 million on the cap.  Dalvin Cook is who started this discussion, and he is 14.1 in 2023.  Jones and Dillon are ~9.9.  The cap savings between the options is pretty big.  If we didn't have the looming Aaron Jones contract (he did re-do it), might we have retained Davante?  Or even kept Reed with part of the 4 million that we have in the difference?

And this was just a quick example.  You wouldn't have to stick to hard 4th round rule, I just wanted to make my rb room without using the benefit of hindsight to take the diamond in the rough player.

[ThatJerkDave]

29 minutes ago, Green19 said:

 

That is the kind of musical I would watch.

[R T]

49 minutes ago, ThatJerkDave said:

But do you think that you couldn't find a fit at least one time in four years?  My original suggestion was to take a mid round pick swing on a RB every year.  So you always have 3 or 4, 20-27 year old RBs, and none of them make much of anything.  For example, Israel Abanikanda has a 4 year 4.2 million dollar contract.  In 2026, he will be 24 years old and have a cap hit of 1.2 million.  

Of course, not every one of the picks is going to work out, whether it is injuries or work ethic, or simply not talented enough.  But that is why you constantly add to the group, and keep it cheap.

If I had used this strategy since 2019 (I take the first RB selected starting with the 4th round) my RB room looks like:

2019: Justice Hill  https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HillJu00.htm

2020: Joshua Kelley https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/K/KellJo01.htm

2021:  Michael Carter https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CartMi03.htm

2022:  Dameon Pierce https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PierDa01.htm

and in 2023, I replace Hill with Roschon Johnson.

 

I didn't pick and choose with hindsight, I just took the first RB from the fourth round.  Obviously draft order changes, but I just wanted an unbiased sample.  I think Pierce illustrates the point the best, if you give the RB the carries, he will produce.  But I think with a good supporting cast, this group of RBs is more than good enough.  And that RB room (all 5) are ~5.8 million on the cap.  Dalvin Cook is who started this discussion, and he is 14.1 in 2023.  Jones and Dillon are ~9.9.  The cap savings between the options is pretty big.  If we didn't have the looming Aaron Jones contract (he did re-do it), might we have retained Davante?  Or even kept Reed with part of the 4 million that we have in the difference?

And this was just a quick example.  You wouldn't have to stick to hard 4th round rule, I just wanted to make my rb room without using the benefit of hindsight to take the diamond in the rough player.

You have switched up from 5th round to 4th round on the fly, but the Packers have mined a lot of talent through the years from the 4th round and that wouldn't be a good tradeoff for a revolving door RB room. If it was taking a flyer on drafting an RB late every year in the 5th-7th I could ride with that idea, but honestly don't think that is even necessary.