Why not draft a runningback #1?

it appears unlikely, in this draft, that a RB will carry the grade/value at #9. Definitive? Of course not, it's a projection.

would be considered by many as a top ten talent..

Gordon I dont believe would be considered a top ten talent.. but he will carry a first round grade for many...

Combine that with the current value in today's NFL we can still get a quality back much later in the draft.

if they have that RB graded highest.

So, what's the question?

but everytime i hear RB taken high, the first name that pops into my head is Trent "can't miss" Richardson..

My understanding is that good RBs can be had later on

Imo

it makes sense to draft a rb at #9. (sarcasm off),

I just don't think NYG will do it.

NYG needs a presence in the backfield for this scheme to be most effective. I don't think anyone is staying up at night trying to figure out Jennings and Williams.

Grabbing Gurley/Johnson/Gordon would be a great addition. I don't think any of them are top 10 overall though.

And no...don't wait until day three "because this is the deepest position in the draft". Thats an awful approach. My fear is NYG will go yet another year crossing RB off the list until day three, a discouraging trend.

In comment 12143034 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

but everytime i hear RB taken high, the first name that pops into my head is Trent "can't miss" Richardson.. My understanding is that good RBs can be had later on

Look around the league...majority of teams have top 100 picks at RB. A lot of which top 64.

First, we won't have a RB with a grade high enough to take at #9. Second, until we sure up the O-Line, what's the point of drafting a RB first? Third, this offense doesn't move through the run game, despite what TC may want. It didn't in Green Bay and it won't here with McAdoo, especially getting a close to 100% Cruz back.

In comment 12143050 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

In comment 12143034 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: but everytime i hear RB taken high, the first name that pops into my head is Trent "can't miss" Richardson.. My understanding is that good RBs can be had later on Look around the league...majority of teams have top 100 picks at RB. A lot of which top 64.

Just not thrilled with any RB taken at 9, no matter how good they were in college..If the Giants do it, then so be it

Gurley might have been, but the injury moots that.

I don't hear a lot of talk about him. He reminds me a lot of Tiki. I don't want him in the first round...but I think he'd be a great fit here.

implication, but it's nothing more than a need to know inquiry:

What was your assessment of Trent Richardson coming into the draft?

In comment 12143034 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

but everytime i hear RB taken high, the first name that pops into my head is Trent "can't miss" Richardson.. My understanding is that good RBs can be had later on

/agree

Your RBs in 90% of situations are only as good as the line. Unless you have Adrian Peterson or some such monster. I would personally NEVER draft a RB in round 1.

In comment 12143079 Thunderstruck27 said:

Quote:

I don't hear a lot of talk about him. He reminds me a lot of Tiki. I don't want him in the first round...but I think he'd be a great fit here.

I like him but he fumbles at an insane rate. I really like Coleman.

and at this point none of the names really get me excited at #9. Getting another WR seems like overkill for that position to me. Safety talent doesn't appear to be there. Shelton will probably be gone. Sherrf and Peat could be good fits but have questions marks. I know backs can be found throughout a draft, however if the back is considered to be special, I wouldn't mind pulling the trigger at 9. Not every back in the 1st round is Trent Richardson. Any position can be a bust. I just feel that we may pass on one of these guys and regret it in a couple of years if they go on to being elite backs in the league.

The NFL has become a pass happy league, RBs typically have shorter careers (compared to other positions), and good RB value can be found a little later in the draft

the offensive line can't block for him.

Even though I'm not sure he is a #1 back, I don't think Jennings had much of an injury history before this year did he?

They can find a change of pace back in a later round.

that's a "No" from moi!

that projects as the next Barry Sanders, you don't spend a top 20 pick on him.

stick to your draft board and pick for value and the future.

From this crop, we're probably looking at WR, edge rusher, or OT at #9, imo.

In comment 12143100 robbieballs2003 said:

Quote:

In comment 12143079 Thunderstruck27 said: Quote: I don't hear a lot of talk about him. He reminds me a lot of Tiki. I don't want him in the first round...but I think he'd be a great fit here. I like him but he fumbles at an insane rate. I really like Coleman.

Agree with this. Abdullah fumbles once every 35 touches which is by far the highest rate of the top draft prospects. He has small hands, even for the position.

I'd take Duke Johnson at 40. TJ Yeldon (although his fumble rate is on the higher side) and Buck Allen are guys I'd consider before Day 2 is out as well. Cameron Artis-Payne is a nice sleeper.

you don't use a first round pick on a RB unless his name is Jim Brown or Gale Sayers. Having said that, I wish Reese was one of those in the know.

but in the NFL I don't feel like he's going to have the success outside the Tackles he had in college. Abdullah's fumbles are troublesome...but if TC could fix Tiki's fumblitis I think Ameer might be worth a shot if he hangs around until the 3rd round.

I'm talking about a special back that can both be a threat in the pass and run game, which I think Gordon and Ghurley will be. That's very valuable in my opinion.

Jennings considered injury prone? Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't this past year the only time he missed games due to injury?

Isn't a great one to have a top 10 pick. I've read debates whether any of the top 3 wrs are worth taken at 9. Also, whether Peat or Scherrf are worth taken at 9. There doesn't seem to be a true 4-3 de worth taken at 9 either. Every player has their flaws but we keep asking, "is he worth the 9th pick"?

So why can't a player like Gordon be considered? Because he plays rb? I understand it's not the Giants way of drafting or rbs can be had later in the draft but after combine whose to say Gordon won't carry a top 10 grade?

He came in at 6'0 216 lbs. What if he runs a 4.4 forty or better and does extremely well in other drills will his draft stock not rise simply because he's a rb?

cause they are not Sayers or Jim Brown, you would pass?
I personally believe you take the best player regardless of position, unless it's a Kicker, but that's just me. I think both of these guys are special and will have great careers. I just don't feel that way about a lot of the players that are being talked about.

I like our offensive weapons. We need to keep Eli upright and confident in his protection. If the OL's are not worthy of the 9th pick you go with the best Defensive player available.

In comment 12143084 Big Blue '56 said:

Quote:

implication, but it's nothing more than a need to know inquiry: What was your assessment of Trent Richardson coming into the draft?

I had Richardson graded as a 1st rounder. Not top 10 though. He was in the 20-25 range.

In comment 12143125 WeatherMan said:

Quote:

that projects as the next Barry Sanders, you don't spend a top 20 pick on him.

But pick #21 is ok?

In comment 12143221 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

In comment 12143084 Big Blue '56 said: Quote: implication, but it's nothing more than a need to know inquiry: What was your assessment of Trent Richardson coming into the draft? I had Richardson graded as a 1st rounder. Not top 10 though. He was in the 20-25 range.

Thank you..

much less at #9. I see this RB class as one with more higher round prospects than usual, but I don't see any AP's, or Lynch's or even any Lacy's. It wouldn't surprise me if none get taken in the 1st, but I would expect a run on them in the 2nd as I think there might be as many as 5 or 6 that carry a 2nd or 3rd round grade.

My suspicion given last years' RB acquisitions is that the Giants won't be interested in any until later in the draft. And despite McAdoo's arrival, I'm convinced that the coaches collectively want a power running game, and RB's that fit it. So if a player like Johnson should happen to stick on the boards until the mid-rounds, they very well might grab him.

Yesterday I posted about Ajayi, and I like him. And while I think he could add to this offense, I'm not sure he'll fit into what Coughlin and company look for in their RB. I think the failure of the Wilson pick may have resolved some dynamic tensions between Coughlin's coaching philosophy and the front office's tendencies.

In comment 12143171 Geeman said:

Quote:

cause they are not Sayers or Jim Brown, you would pass? I personally believe you take the best player regardless of position, unless it's a Kicker, but that's just me. I think both of these guys are special and will have great careers. I just don't feel that way about a lot of the players that are being talked about.

AP is on the level of Brown and Sayers though

Just checked NFL.Com to see if they had weights and measurements for RB's. If they're current they show David Johnson at 6'1", 224 with 9 5/8"hands. Ajayi came in at 6', 221 with 10" hands. Ajayi is bigger than I thought and has nice sized hands.

Interesting!

NFL.Com, Combine Participants - ( New Window )

first name Duke. can grab him in the third.

those are the two guys, I think, fit our RB profile. Bigger guys that can catch.

you should go near a RB in the first 15 picks of the draft, you can get one later. Maybe if there is the next Barry Sanders, then you pull the trigger but that is rare.

And for the Giants, it makes zero sense. You could draft the next Barry Sanders at 9 and if you don't fix the oline, it is moot.

it's a good chance 1 of them is there for the Giants in the 2nd if they want.

OP: I don't consider Wilson & his weird injury a "bust". He's just on that growing list of Giants players who were looking very good but had their career's cut short. TT, Phillips, S Smith, Jr., Nicks, Cruz. etc...

The Giants passing on Eddie George to take Cedric Jones. That was a bad day! The Giants say they are looking for playmakers. RBs are playmakers. Good ones, anyway.

You can't ignore Gurleys injury history. I'm not just talking about his most recent, but throughout his college career, he's been banged up. And to me, that's the only reason why he'd even be a question mark to take in round 2.

My biggest draft fear is the Cowboys take him, and actually upgrade over Demarco Murray!

Abdullah has that Academic All American and team captain thing going on, too, so there's that in his favor on the good guy side... Can't imagine the Giants go to day 3 w/out drafting an RB this year...

In comment 12143550 Nomad Crow on the Madison said:

Quote:

The Giants passing on Eddie George to take Cedric Jones. That was a bad day! The Giants say they are looking for playmakers. RBs are playmakers. Good ones, anyway.

The bad day started and ended with the Ravens taking Ogden. Can't believe the year we pick in the top 5, it was a 4 person draft. But Cedric Jones, holy crap that was a bad pick. Total panic move.

In comment 12143298 TC said:

Quote:

Just checked NFL.Com to see if they had weights and measurements for RB's. If they're current they show David Johnson at 6'1", 224 with 9 5/8"hands. Ajayi came in at 6', 221 with 10" hands. Ajayi is bigger than I thought and has nice sized hands. Interesting! NFL.Com, Combine Participants - ( New Window )

And Gordon, who moves like a scatback, came in at 6'1" and 215# and is ripped. But he's not a top half first rounder? BS!

In comment 12143298 TC said:

Quote:

Just checked NFL.Com to see if they had weights and measurements for RB's. If they're current they show David Johnson at 6'1", 224 with 9 5/8"hands. Ajayi came in at 6', 221 with 10" hands. Ajayi is bigger than I thought and has nice sized hands. Interesting! NFL.Com, Combine Participants - ( New Window )

Ajayi's hands are bigger than I thought. He had 7 fumbles (4 lost) this past year. One of the higher fumbling rates among RBs

Have more to do with him taking so many hits. He is always fighting not for extra yards, but for extra inches. It's admirable but by no means does it dismiss his low grade on ball security. He has paws for hands (especially for RBs)...but he is just over-aggressive and leaves himself prone to the late fumble.

In comment 12143722 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

Have more to do with him taking so many hits. He is always fighting not for extra yards, but for extra inches. It's admirable but by no means does it dismiss his low grade on ball security. He has paws for hands (especially for RBs)...but he is just over-aggressive and leaves himself prone to the late fumble.

I agree, his enthusiasm is off the charts, which along with talent, is something I want to see. If they don't want to be the best, I'd prefer to find another player who does.

Fumbles is certainly a consideration, but if Ajayi is coachable, he's got the tools to correct it.

the Giants need better run blocking from the o-line more than better running backs.

or 3rd.

On a RB that high in this draft. Too much value in later rounds. Imo, the Giants should take a playmaker at WR. ( and yes, I do have a favorite )

then yeah, why not. If it's close or they have doubts at all about the RBs, I wouldn't. It's not like the Giants have zero talent there. They have a couple of pretty good guys. They just need to stay healthy and need better run blocking.

and the time we drafted Ahmad Bradshaw near the end of the seventh round and I forget about drafting a running back in round one.

I concur

I think the Giants sense of BPA (when drafting early) is in one of the premium positions (QB, WR, CB, DE, OT). They might take a wavier on a RB if they were drafting 32nd, but they aren't. Thats why i don't even see a RB coming into play until day 3 of the draft, if they even decide to go that route.

In comment 12143912 Ira said:

Quote:

and the time we drafted Ahmad Bradshaw near the end of the seventh round and I forget about drafting a running back in round one.

I wanted Shaun Alexander..

In comment 12143912 Ira said:

Quote:

and the time we drafted Ahmad Bradshaw near the end of the seventh round and I forget about drafting a running back in round one.

Foolish.

I started a thread the day we took David Wilson in 2012 saying we should have taken Cordy Glenn for the basic reason that until we fixed the Oline it would be stupid to take a running back.

We haven't been able to competently run block for 4 years now. I'm not going to "in Reese I trust this one" they have botched this for too long. I don't know if it is a talent evaluation problem, bad luck, or ignorance. And it isn't just the run blocking but the line is worse at "moving the pile" than pass blocking so it's more glaring there.

Our rushing ranks:

2014: 23
2013: 29
2012:14
2011: 32

4 Year average 24.5

It's even worse that we are a cold weather team that doesn't have a running game because there are plenty of games late in the season where quite frankly we need one.

Who even knows what we have with Andre Williams anyway?

Could you argue that the talent hasn't quite been there? Possibly. But anyone who watches this team knows there are games when we can't block anyone, run or pass. AND this line consistently gets no push in short yardage and goal line situations.

Fix the line. Especially before spending another premium pick to get someone that won't have holes opened for them.

In comment 12144374 blueblood said:

Quote:

In comment 12143912 Ira said: Quote: and the time we drafted Ahmad Bradshaw near the end of the seventh round and I forget about drafting a running back in round one. I wanted Shaun Alexander..

The two I wanted went before our pick. Jamal Lewis and then Thomas Jones.

In comment 12143226 Sy'56 said:

Quote:

In comment 12143125 WeatherMan said: Quote: that projects as the next Barry Sanders, you don't spend a top 20 pick on him. But pick #21 is ok?

Late getting back to this, sorry about that. In every draft there's a top group of players and then the next, not always 20 but I figured it was a decent generalization. When we get the rare chances to be picking from that elite tier of prospects I want a player that we think can be an impact force for the next decade, and I do not believe it is possible to project any RB to do that - they are exceedingly rare. Hence my blanket opposition to spending high first round picks at that position.

In comment 12144413 NoGainDayne said:

Quote:

I started a thread the day we took David Wilson in 2012 saying we should have taken Cordy Glenn for the basic reason that until we fixed the Oline it would be stupid to take a running back. We haven't been able to competently run block for 4 years now. I'm not going to "in Reese I trust this one" they have botched this for too long. I don't know if it is a talent evaluation problem, bad luck, or ignorance. And it isn't just the run blocking but the line is worse at "moving the pile" than pass blocking so it's more glaring there. Our rushing ranks: 2014: 23 2013: 29 2012:14 2011: 32 4 Year average 24.5 It's even worse that we are a cold weather team that doesn't have a running game because there are plenty of games late in the season where quite frankly we need one. Who even knows what we have with Andre Williams anyway? Could you argue that the talent hasn't quite been there? Possibly. But anyone who watches this team knows there are games when we can't block anyone, run or pass. AND this line consistently gets no push in short yardage and goal line situations. Fix the line. Especially before spending another premium pick to get someone that won't have holes opened for them.

Great 4 year stats analysis, and what I like best about it is one can use those 4 years' data to make exactly the opposite point! 2012, the one year the rushing attack was middle of the pack rather than scraping bottom, was the year tha Giants drafted Wilson. Though he garnered only 71 carries, 7 of them were 20+ yard gains (5>20, 2>40). That accounted for a big part of the rushing attack improvement that year...

if wilson is a 1st rounder DUke is. Duke is superior to him in every catogery besides speed. Both same build. Just throwing that out there.

I think we are truly in need of a speedy RB with all the requirements that TC looks for but not at the #1 pick, a lot of these guys are available throughout the draft .

In comment 12144469 BlueLou said:

Quote:

In comment 12144413 NoGainDayne said: Quote: I started a thread the day we took David Wilson in 2012 saying we should have taken Cordy Glenn for the basic reason that until we fixed the Oline it would be stupid to take a running back. We haven't been able to competently run block for 4 years now. I'm not going to "in Reese I trust this one" they have botched this for too long. I don't know if it is a talent evaluation problem, bad luck, or ignorance. And it isn't just the run blocking but the line is worse at "moving the pile" than pass blocking so it's more glaring there. Our rushing ranks: 2014: 23 2013: 29 2012:14 2011: 32 4 Year average 24.5 It's even worse that we are a cold weather team that doesn't have a running game because there are plenty of games late in the season where quite frankly we need one. Who even knows what we have with Andre Williams anyway? Could you argue that the talent hasn't quite been there? Possibly. But anyone who watches this team knows there are games when we can't block anyone, run or pass. AND this line consistently gets no push in short yardage and goal line situations. Fix the line. Especially before spending another premium pick to get someone that won't have holes opened for them. Great 4 year stats analysis, and what I like best about it is one can use those 4 years' data to make exactly the opposite point! 2012, the one year the rushing attack was middle of the pack rather than scraping bottom, was the year tha Giants drafted Wilson. Though he garnered only 71 carries, 7 of them were 20+ yard gains (5>20, 2>40). That accounted for a big part of the rushing attack improvement that year...

Read my thread, I was right It is your analysis that actually comes up short. Wilson averaged 5 ypc that year and Andre Brown 5.3. 2012 was the aberration, we also had Martellus Bennett that year who helped seal the edge for outside runners consistently. The point I made was that the line was aging and I ended it with "I hope it doesn't catch up with us" it plays right into my argument and shows that I actually had more foresight than the management on this particular issue as the line completely collapsed in 2013, due to our inability to bring in young talent to support the aging line. It is you who has the lazy analysis sir. I'm not sure why you would want to take the position that this team has properly addressed the Oline or the adjoining point that if you want a successful RB you need a good Oline.

Here is actually another thread I was just reviewing in which you are a Giants OL apologist where not only is there support of the Glenn vs. Wilson argument but posters going out of their way to apologize for Wilson that he hasn't had a decent line to run behind. Stick a fork in your argument, it's done.

behind a great offensive line.

because their shorter shelf life and the ability to cobble together an effective ground game with a bunch of average guys.

That said, elite guys are still elite guys and should be drafted as such.

I don't think either of the two backs are worthy of the 9th pick.

I want to go RB in the 2nd or 3rd Rb.

In comment 12143144 Salty Meats said:

Quote:

you don't use a first round pick on a RB unless his name is Jim Brown or Gale Sayers. Having said that, I wish Reese was one of those in the know.

Just how do you know, before hand, who's got greatness in him?

Maybe Gordon is that guy.

In comment 12144956 OC2.0 said:

Quote:

In comment 12143144 Salty Meats said: Quote: you don't use a first round pick on a RB unless his name is Jim Brown or Gale Sayers. Having said that, I wish Reese was one of those in the know. Just how do you know, before hand, who's got greatness in him? Maybe Gordon is that guy.

It's not like you can't tell which are the great ones.

Everybody knew Adrian Peterson was going to be an animal.
Same for Ricky Williams.

Occasionally they get it wrong, like Darren McFadden, but there have been plenty of times where they get it right.

In comment 12143912 Ira said:

Quote:

and the time we drafted Ahmad Bradshaw near the end of the seventh round and I forget about drafting a running back in round one.

In the first round won't necesssrily fix the OL but it could fuck things up for the entire team.

Every single time someone says to draft a player in round one that doesn't play on the OL people around here act like the OL will go virtually ignored this entire offseason.

You can have it both ways. We can draft a playmaker at 9 and still fix the OL.

Take a guess how many first rounders played on every single one of the Giants super bowl teams? All four... How many first rounders?

One. William Roberts. And he was drafted as a tackle and moved to guard. Every other starting linemen from every Giants super bowl team was drafted after round one unless you count Eric Moore who was really more of a super sub. I believe bob kratch started more games in 90.

How many first rounders were on those great dallas olines from the 90s? I believe the number is zero.

You can fix the OL without reaching for OL in the first round and If you think this team magically wins 10 games in 2013 and 2014 of they draft linemen early on in 2011 and 2012 I have a bridge to sell you.

You know what turned this offense around? It wasn't an olineman. It was the hr hitter-- beckham. We need more of that.

Than against you re fixing the OL, and in fact was way ahead of most here, by years... But 9 overall? That has to be an IMPACT player at that slot. I doubt that is an OL, which is more about the sum of the parts than individuals...

Than against you re fixing the OL, and in fact was way ahead of most here, by years... But 9 overall? That has to be an IMPACT player at that slot. I doubt that is an OL, which is more about the sum of the parts than individuals...

Than against you re fixing the OL, and in fact was way ahead of most here, by years... But 9 overall? That has to be an IMPACT player at that slot. I doubt that is an OL, which is more about the sum of the parts than individuals...

Than against you re fixing the OL, and in fact was way ahead of most here, by years... But 9 overall? That has to be an IMPACT player at that slot. I doubt that is an OL, which is more about the sum of the parts than individuals...

Than against you re fixing the OL, and in fact was way ahead of most here, by years... But 9 overall? That has to be an IMPACT player at that slot. I doubt that is an OL, which is more about the sum of the parts than individuals...

Than against you re fixing the OL, and in fact was way ahead of most here, by years... But 9 overall? That has to be an IMPACT player at that slot. I doubt that is an OL, which is more about the sum of the parts than individuals...

Than against you re fixing the OL, and in fact was way ahead of most here, by years... But 9 overall? That has to be an IMPACT player at that slot. I doubt that is an OL, which is more about the sum of the parts than individuals...

Than against you re fixing the OL, and in fact was way ahead of most here, by years... But 9 overall? That has to be an IMPACT player at that slot. I doubt that is an OL, which is more about the sum of the parts than individuals...

Pardon all the re-posts...

‏@Gil_Brandt Actually catches deep ball well. Struggles on short routes. RT @NFL_CFB: Coates had drop on a deep ball. Mayock: "That's the knock on him."

‏@Gil_Brandt Fastest group of wide recivers I've ever been around at the #NFLCombine. Only 1 in 4.7 range was Funchess, and he was TE at UM.

wrong thread