If Reese is truly going to stick with the Best Player Available approach, regardless of need, and Elliott is there at 10, he has to be the pick.
He's the best playmaker in this draft, could be the best overall player, other than maybe a healthy Smith or Jack. Not saying I'm advocating for Elliott to be the pick, but if it's a BPA approach, he's it.
It's like the idiot Giants fans who were calling OBJ a bust or calling him Becky because he was injured as a rookie.
I get your point, but I don't see how a breakaway TD from Gurley is somehow better than a breakaway TD from Elliott.
You aren't "taking me to task" for shit. You are knocking a guy for putting up less yards in 13 games than others in 16? Don't be an idiot. You also came up with four names in the past 10 years. Nice work.
Your point is idiotic, and doubling down on it is even more so.
How is it a poorly researched fact? Those 4 names all had better seasons than Gurley. You said Gurley had the best rookie year for a running back in a very long time - did you not?
Ever take a look at their QB and WR situation? I have and its awful. Gurley had a great rookie season off of a serious injury in a horrible offense.
2900 passing yards with 681 yards receiving leading the team.
Gurley was resonsible for almost 27% of the teams yards and that's all in 12/13 games. For comparison's sake Adrian Peterson was responsible for 33% of the Vikings offense and that's over 16 games; in that regard Gurley was slightly more effective.
Quote:
Again, I'm not the one who is making ridiculous claims and then backing them up with poorly researched facts.
How is it a poorly researched fact? Those 4 names all had better seasons than Gurley. You said Gurley had the best rookie year for a running back in a very long time - did you not?
Doug Martin played in 3 more games and had one more TD and a lower YPC. That isn't a better season.
Alfred Morris had a great rookie year as well, but that was in a gimmick option offense with RG3 pitching him the ball with yards of open space in front of him. When RG3 left, you saw what happened to Alfred.
I won't even address Lynch and AP, since that was almost a decade ago.
And even so, being the 5th most productive rookie RB in the past decade is remarkable. Especially after he was under a year removed from an ACL surgery and playing with a shitshow of a QB. Much like AP, people were loading the box against him and still couldn't stop him.
Ezekiel Elliot may be a good NFL RB, but the chances of him being better than Gurley are extremely remote. That's the equivalent of saying that Carson Wentz is going to be better than Eli. It's just a dumb claim to make at this point.
They are facts in a vacuum, which in the NFL, and especially college is fucking worthless. If pure stats were everything, Keenan Reynolds would be going in the first round this week. Dude literally set the career mark for most touchdowns in NCAA history.
I just presented some indisputable facts. Not trying to pile it on, but Gurley had a remarkable year considering his and his teams circumstances. And you can't just cut out 5 games from his statline when 5 games consisted of almost half his season. If he racked up 400 yards and 6 TD's in 1 game I'd give you that, but that just isn't the case.
Thomas Rawls had a 5.6 average his rookie year - are you going to say he was the best? No, obviously not.
I get your point, but I don't see how a breakaway TD from Gurley is somehow better than a breakaway TD from Elliott.
I can't stand when people state a fact to disagree with someone else and say "you're an idiot" and do not back their opinion.
I guess it's just the eye test as well. Gurley to me was Peterson-esq. He just dominated games (every other play seemed like he was breaking free). He seemed like a man among boys with his size, speed and vision. Always working his way to finding a hole and just exploding once he hit the second wave of tacklers. With Elliot I don't see the quick feet through the hole or the SAME explosion Gurley had. I saw him taking 25 carries a game and breaking free untouched with a few of them. Of course he had his moments, but Gurley had the Peterson feel watching him. Elliot has the Fred Taylor feel at Florida. Still very good and more well-rounded just not elite. Again I could be way off I'm not an expert by any means, but just my gut feeling.
And Rawls is clearly a very good player, and saying that Zeke is better than him would be almost as nuts.
Haha, that's your argument? He average 100 yards per game when including his first game back which he only had 6 carries for 9 yards.
His two wost games were in blowouts to Cincy and Arizona where his offense scored 7 and 3 points and they stopped running the ball.
I'm being trolled.
Quote:
And Rawls is clearly a very good player, and saying that Zeke is better than him would be almost as nuts.
Alright Jon...if I can't say that I think Ezekiel Elliott is a better running back than Thomas Rawls (after 1 season in the pros) then I sincerely apologize.
All we know about Elliot is he likes to blame his coaches after losses and he put up big numbers in a spread offense with massive holes in front of him.
Quote:
averaged 40 yards a game in those 3 games he missed, or he could have averaged 100. You don't know, cause he didn't play them..
Haha, that's your argument? He average 100 yards per game when including his first game back which he only had 6 carries for 9 yards.
His two wost games were in blowouts to Cincy and Arizona where his offense scored 7 and 3 points and they stopped running the ball.
I'm being trolled.
Gonna have to disagree with you there. His two worst games were when he had 21 carries for 48 yards against Tampa, and 25 carries for 66 against Baltimore. About a 2.2 average in those games. Again, this happens all the time with good backs, but I'm not really counting the games where he had 6 or 7 carries as bad ones.
Quote:
In comment 12922357 ryanmkeane said:
Quote:
averaged 40 yards a game in those 3 games he missed, or he could have averaged 100. You don't know, cause he didn't play them..
Haha, that's your argument? He average 100 yards per game when including his first game back which he only had 6 carries for 9 yards.
His two wost games were in blowouts to Cincy and Arizona where his offense scored 7 and 3 points and they stopped running the ball.
I'm being trolled.
Gonna have to disagree with you there. His two worst games were when he had 21 carries for 48 yards against Tampa, and 25 carries for 66 against Baltimore. About a 2.2 average in those games. Again, this happens all the time with good backs, but I'm not really counting the games where he had 6 or 7 carries as bad ones.
Disagree all you want. Go look up AP's bad games. 14 carries for 3 yards against San Francisco or 9 for 27 against Washington. You can make an argument he had worse games than Gurley.
Point being, if you aren't going to compare him to his peers, what are you arguing?
Look, all I said was I think Elliott has better vision, and better cut back ability, and clearly is a better blocker (i don't think anyone would dispute this) which is why I think he's an all around better back. What is so hard to understand about this..
As for Elliot who'm I like, he'd have big shoes to fill to compare to Gurley's rookie season. Elliot likely goes to a much better offense (Dallas, Eagles, Giants for example), and will still have a hard time equaling what Gurley did on a per game basis.
Long term, I don't see how you can possibly make the decision that Elliot is better. Gurley came back from that injury and showed zero signs of impaired ability. Gurley is the more electric player and I don't really see that as a debatable topic. If you want to say Elliot is more complete, go nuts, but I still don't see how you prove that when he hasn't played a down yet in the NFL.
You don't know that. I strongly doubt Pete Carroll would trade Rawls for anyone right now after the season he just had.
Geez, relax guys. I want Elliot badly too! But I do not believe that he is as explosive as Gurley. Remember, Gurley ran behind one of the worst OLines in the NFL last year.
With that said, Elliot still is by far more talented than any RB the Giants have had since Tiki. And that includes Bradshaw (although Ahmad was a different type of RB than Elliot).
Elliot might not have the skill-set of a Gurley, but he's not far off. Where Gurley might be compared to Adrian Peterson, Elliot might be considered to be a little stockier version of Curtis Martin.
Either way, if Zeke falls to us, I doubt JR is going to pass on him if he is serious about keeping his job!
Exactly.
Plenty of people believe Elliot is an elite RB talent. Plenty of people believe Elliot is every bit the prospect Gurley was coming out, and he's not hurt.
How bout we settle this debate this way...If the Giants draft Elliot and Elliot is merely being mentioned in the same breath as guys like Peterson and Gurley we will all be thrilled? Fair enough?
Plenty of people believe Elliot is an elite RB talent. Plenty of people believe Elliot is every bit the prospect Gurley was coming out, and he's not hurt.
How bout we settle this debate this way...If the Giants draft Elliot and Elliot is merely being mentioned in the same breath as guys like Peterson and Gurley we will all be thrilled? Fair enough?
Again, I fully support the Elliot pick if that's what we end up doing, but I don't think he's a similar prospect to Gurley. And the only reason I brought up AP on this thread is because he led the league in rushing while Gurley was 3rd, so I was comparing him accordingly when told he didn't have an impressive season.
I agree with the consensus glaring needs in play at 10.
LB/Pass Rusher, WR, OL, CB
However looking at picks 3-9, the only prime candidates to have Elliot on their radar IMO are:
4. Dallas - would be hard pressed to not take a Pass Rusher or Ramsey.
8. Cleveland - need everything, and probably like Duke Johnson, but need a splash.
Zeke is becoming more possible than I ever wanted or thought 2 months ago. Biggest impact to me, besides a healthy Jack. Tops my wish list.