Double chubble

[TdungyW/12]

I know there’s a lot of talk of Chubb falling to us at 6 which is a big possibility and I am 100% on board for this. 

 

Addressing the second round CB has already stated about how the O-line can fixed because of the talent that is there but what if we use our first pick in the second round on Nick Chubb .... this guy is being over looked because of all the talk on barkley. Nick could very well be our 3 down back with mixing Mack in there for a good 1/2 punch. 

[horseshoecrabs]

I would just like to have some of our needs on offense & defense addressed after all this is said and done. In which order it falls depends on the hand we are dealt in the draft. Right now our team is on life support. We just need a good draft as a stepping stone to help along the rebuild & give fans hope, as a first step.

[rockywoj]

29 minutes ago, TdungyW/12 said:

I know there’s a lot of talk of Chubb falling to us at 6 which is a big possibility and I am 100% on board for this. 

 

Addressing the second round CB has already stated about how the O-line can fixed because of the talent that is there but what if we use our first pick in the second round on Nick Chubb .... this guy is being over looked because of all the talk on barkley. Nick could very well be our 3 down back with mixing Mack in there for a good 1/2 punch. 

I would approve of the Chubbs both becoming Colts.

[tvturner]

Not a fan of Nick Chubb

Plenty of other better choices

[Hoose]

1 minute ago, tvturner said:

Not a fan of Nick Chubb

Plenty of other better choices

Amen. 

[NorthernBlue]

If we’re going Georgia Back in the second, I’d prefer Sony Michel. I’ll take Chubb in the third. 

[NewColtsFan]

I'd love to have the "other " Chubb...   but not at pick 36 or 37.

 

Maybe with pick 49, or preferably pick 67.

 

I think pick 36 is way too early.

 

[stitches]

Yeah, I love Chubb. He's one of my favorite backs and I think he actually is one of the best complements to Mack. I think there probably will be better players at more important positions at 36 and 37, but if he drops to 49 or our third round pick I'd be happy to get him there. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

12 hours ago, tvturner said:

Not a fan of Nick Chubb

Plenty of other better choices

 

12 hours ago, Hoose said:

Amen. 

 

Name them, so we are all in the loop too...

 

9 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

I'd love to have the "other " Chubb...   but not at pick 36 or 37.

 

Maybe with pick 49, or preferably pick 67.

 

I think pick 36 is way too early.

 

There's no such thing as 'too early'. There is such a thing as 'too late', though.  If he gets taken before pick #49, or alternativley # 67, you're too late.

 

The deal is... if a 'guy' you (team/GM) want is on the board when it is your turn to select, and you don't' know for certain if he will be on the board on your next round turn... you go ahead get him if his name is next on  your draft board.  There's no 'too early'. But if you pass and he then comes off the board at #48 or earlier... you're 'too late'.  So GM's, coaches, and scouts graded everyone.  If his name is there when it is selection time, you turn in the card.  The fans and media scream 'reach! too early'.. etc.  but they didn't do all the work the scouts and team did in data collection and evaluation. Period.

[tvturner]

6 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

Name them, so we are all in the loop too...

 

There's no such thing as 'too early'. There is such a thing as 'too late', though.  If he gets taken before pick #49, or alternativley # 67, you're too late.

 

The deal is... if a 'guy' you (team/GM) want is on the board when it is your turn to select, and you don't' know for certain if he will be on the board on your next round turn... you go ahead get him if his name is next on  your draft board.  There's no 'too early'. But if you pass and he then comes off the board at #48 or earlier... you're 'too late'.  So GM's, coaches, and scouts graded everyone.  If his name is there when it is selection time, you turn in the card.  The fans and media scream 'reach! too early'.. etc.  but they didn't do all the work the scouts and team did in data collection and evaluation. Period.

Barkley

Guice

Jones

Michel

Penny

Freeman 

Johnson 

[shasta519]

8 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

Name them, so we are all in the loop too...

 

There's no such thing as 'too early'. There is such a thing as 'too late', though.  If he gets taken before pick #49, or alternativley # 67, you're too late.

 

The deal is... if a 'guy' you (tram/GM) wants is on the board when it is your turn to select, and you don't' know for certain if he will be on the board on your next round turn... you go ahead get him if his name is next on  your draft board.  There's no 'too early'. But if you pass and he then comes off the board at #48 or earlier... you're 'too late'.  So GM's, coaches, and scouts graded everyone.  If his name is there when it is selection time, you turn in the card.  The fans and media scream 'reach! too early'.. etc.  but they didn't do all the work the scouts and team did in data collection and evaluation. Period

 

You still have to take calculated risks in the draft. I think there can definitely be "too early." 

[TdungyW/12]

53 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

You still have to take calculated risks in the draft. I think there can definitely be "too early." 

Well yeah lol if you take nick Chubb at 1 or in the first round that’s way too early ..... but early in second I wouldn’t say that’s too early.

[DaColts85]

1 hour ago, shastamasta said:

 

You still have to take calculated risks in the draft. I think there can definitely be "too early." 

Based on what a GM and his staff has there is no "too early".  You will have other players ahead of guys if it were "too early" as you said.  This is why they spend a lot of time and money of getting there board set.  That is what helps (you hope anyways) for all the calculated risk.  Every pick is a risk!

[Four2itus]

Thread title of the year. 

[NewColtsFan]

8 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

Name them, so we are all in the loop too...

 

There's no such thing as 'too early'. There is such a thing as 'too late', though.  If he gets taken before pick #49, or alternativley # 67, you're too late.

 

The deal is... if a 'guy' you (team/GM) want is on the board when it is your turn to select, and you don't' know for certain if he will be on the board on your next round turn... you go ahead get him if his name is next on  your draft board.  There's no 'too early'. But if you pass and he then comes off the board at #48 or earlier... you're 'too late'.  So GM's, coaches, and scouts graded everyone.  If his name is there when it is selection time, you turn in the card.  The fans and media scream 'reach! too early'.. etc.  but they didn't do all the work the scouts and team did in data collection and evaluation. Period.

 

No.    sorry, this is not true.    Not even a little bit.   Apologies in advance, but my response will be long.   

 

Now, if you want to argue that none of us knows where Nick Chubb is ranked and Ballard may have him ranked 30th so taking him at 36 is actually a steal for Ballard, that's fine, but that's a different argument.

 

There's a word for General Managers who draft too many players too early.  That word is "unemployed."   It typically means you're a bad judge of talent.  Make enough mistakes and you typically get unemployed.

 

Why do you think teams trade down?   It's not because they don't like a player.  It's because they don't want to pick the player where the team currently sits and they're willing to trade down to hopefully get the player they want, and collect more picks.  But they're willing to lose the player and they'll be happy to take a different player at a lower draft spot.    Look at all the trading down Ballard did in the 4th round.  He added picks and still get the guy he liked at a spot he felt more comfortable with.  The value was in adding picks.

 

And this is all especially true at running back where a lot of teams might love 3 or 4  RBs this year.   It's not hard to see a GM like Ballard saying in the War Room that he loves Chubb, but he can pass on Chubb with the picks in the 30's and take two defensive players because he thinks he can get Penny or Jones at 49  or Freeman or Johnson at 67.

 

In 2012, Seattle had Russell Wilson ranked in the top-5 on their board.   They drafted other guys in the first and second round because they felt no other team would take Wilson before they had him targeted, 3rd round, pick 75.   They didn't even make a trade to ensure they'd get a guy they had rated so highly.  They stayed put and picked Wilson where they targeted him.   And they were right.  

 

GMs who know how to work the draft value trying to get the right guy at the right pick.  They don't like picking a player too early, because they believe the pick loses value to the team.

 

If you're drafting 2nd round talent in the first round and 3rd round guys in the second and 4th round guys in the third then you're making mistakes.   You may not know it's a mistake the day of the draft, but you'll figure it out sooner or later.  Make enough of these bad decisions and you'll be out of a job soon enough.

 

I've followed the NFL and the draft for over 50 years now (I'm 61) and from everything I've read and heard the concept of drafting a player too early is very real. 

 

Sorry, we seriously disagree on this one.

 

[NewColtsFan]

9 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

Name them, so we are all in the loop too...

 

There's no such thing as 'too early'. There is such a thing as 'too late', though.  If he gets taken before pick #49, or alternativley # 67, you're too late.

 

The deal is... if a 'guy' you (team/GM) want is on the board when it is your turn to select, and you don't' know for certain if he will be on the board on your next round turn... you go ahead get him if his name is next on  your draft board.  There's no 'too early'. But if you pass and he then comes off the board at #48 or earlier... you're 'too late'.  So GM's, coaches, and scouts graded everyone.  If his name is there when it is selection time, you turn in the card.  The fans and media scream 'reach! too early'.. etc.  but they didn't do all the work the scouts and team did in data collection and evaluation. Period.

 

OK....

 

I've come up with another example,  and I think this one will resonate with you.    

 

Fast foward a week...   it's Day One of the draft,  and the Colts are on the clock with the 6th pick.     Three QB's, Chubb and Nelson have been taken.       So, the Colts are sitting there and Saquan Barkley is there for the taking....

 

Now, Commissioner Roger Goodell walks out to announce the Colts pick.    And there's NO trade,  we're picking a player.       And the Commissioner announces....

 

"With the 6th pick in the 2018 draft,  the Indianapolis Colts select..............    Running Back.......    Nick Chubb!"

 

You going to be OK with that?      You going to tell people here the Colts know what they're doing?     You going to defend this move?      I hope you're going to say no....

 

I'd be beyond furious.    As angry as I could be but I would not call for Ballard to be fired.    But many in the local media would --- that night.

 

If Ballard and his team have Chubb rated as the highest running back on their board,  you do NOT take him with the 6th pick, and certainly not ahead of Barkley.     Youd' sit and wait and take Chubb with pick 36.     You'd wait for a more reasonable pick to select him.    You have to have some feel for how the rest of the NFL views the same player.   

 

Not that you'd care,  but I'd put Chubb somewhere between pick 45-75.   I'd guess that's where most teams have him.

 

But you do not take him 6th overall.    Even if you think he's the best back.    There's an art to this.   You have to know how to work the draft.      And taking Nick Chubb 6th overall (especially with Barkley available)  would be way, Way, WAY too soon.   

 

I hope we can agree on that.....

[OffensivelyPC]

16 hours ago, tvturner said:

Not a fan of Nick Chubb

Plenty of other better choices

Not to mention Chubb is not even worth a 2nd.

[Four2itus]

Too early....or too late.....is a post draft analysis. You never pick a player too early or too late...on the day of the draft....if that player is rated on your board where you pick them. 

[ColtsBlueFL]

7 hours ago, tvturner said:

Barkley

Guice

Jones

Michel

Penny

Freeman 

Johnson 

 

Gil Brandt disagrees, and he is much more credit worthy in draft evaluation than you are.  He feels only Barkley (#1), and Guice (#30) above N. Chubb at #34.  The rest are lower.  

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000926642/article/hot-150-gil-brandts-topranked-prospects-for-2018-nfl-draft

 

5 hours ago, TdungyW/12 said:

Well yeah lol if you take nick Chubb at 1 or in the first round that’s way too early ..... but early in second I wouldn’t say that’s too early.

 

4 hours ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

No.    sorry, this is not true.    Not even a little bit.   Apologies in advance, but my response will be long.   

 

Now, if you want to argue that none of us knows where Nick Chubb is ranked and Ballard may have him ranked 30th so taking him at 36 is actually a steal for Ballard, that's fine, but that's a different argument.

 

There's a word for General Managers who draft too many players too early.  That word is "unemployed."   It typically means you're a bad judge of talent.  Make enough mistakes and you typically get unemployed.

 

Why do you think teams trade down?   It's not because they don't like a player.  It's because they don't want to pick the player where the team currently sits and they're willing to trade down to hopefully get the player they want, and collect more picks.  But they're willing to lose the player and they'll be happy to take a different player at a lower draft spot.    Look at all the trading down Ballard did in the 4th round.  He added picks and still get the guy he liked at a spot he felt more comfortable with.  The value was in adding picks.

 

And this is all especially true at running back where a lot of teams might love 3 or 4  RBs this year.   It's not hard to see a GM like Ballard saying in the War Room that he loves Chubb, but he can pass on Chubb with the picks in the 30's and take two defensive players because he thinks he can get Penny or Jones at 49  or Freeman or Johnson at 67.

 

In 2012, Seattle had Russell Wilson ranked in the top-5 on their board.   They drafted other guys in the first and second round because they felt no other team would take Wilson before they had him targeted, 3rd round, pick 75.   They didn't even make a trade to ensure they'd get a guy they had rated so highly.  They stayed put and picked Wilson where they targeted him.   And they were right.  

 

GMs who know how to work the draft value trying to get the right guy at the right pick.  They don't like picking a player too early, because they believe the pick loses value to the team.

 

If you're drafting 2nd round talent in the first round and 3rd round guys in the second and 4th round guys in the third then you're making mistakes.   You may not know it's a mistake the day of the draft, but you'll figure it out sooner or later.  Make enough of these bad decisions and you'll be out of a job soon enough.

 

I've followed the NFL and the draft for over 50 years now (I'm 61) and from everything I've read and heard the concept of drafting a player too early is very real. 

 

Sorry, we seriously disagree on this one.

 

 

If Nick Chubb is taken above Barkley, that is not taking to early, that is plain poor evaluation of talent.  They felt he was a better pick than the other guy for their team and scheme.  It might work, but it is the stuff that gets GM's fired.  Not getting the full player translation evaluation right, that is what gets GM's fired.

 

Pat Kirwan says GM's don't trade down when they calculate there is no way they can get the guy they have targeted at that lower draft spot.  Because as much as coaches/GM's teams say BPA, their BPA player grades have built in 'needs' bias built in.  It's human nature.

 

And this - "In 2012, Seattle had Russell Wilson ranked in the top-5 on their board."  

 

Well, I don't buy it.  You'll need to supply proof.  Pat Kirwan knows Pete Carroll very well, and I heard the story he had to be convinced by John Schneider to take him.  JS even wanted to use a second rounder on him, but Pete finally relented in round three.  He was lucky as I heard the Eagles (who took Foles) were going to take him in round 3, and if not, after that the Colts were going to use pick #92 on him to back up Luck (We got T.Y. Hilton instead). There were other teams behind them lined up in round 3 as well ready to pull the trigger on Wilson.  But No team had him top 5.  If you do, you trade up to get them.  That's not the case, but Schneider said there were two players he wasn't going to leave the draft without which was defensive end Bruce Irvin and Russell Wilson. People said back then the Seahawks reached when they drafted both men.  That proved to not be the case.

 

Now on to youtr other example- "Now, if you want to argue that none of us knows where Nick Chubb is ranked and Ballard may have him ranked 30th so taking him at 36 is actually a steal for Ballard, that's fine, but that's a different argument."

 

No I'm going to argue (pure hypothetical for illustrative purposes) that Ballard has Chubb listed at #46 on the horizontal board, But his pick he selects him is #37.  Now if a team was going to take him at #40, then it was a good move.  But if he would have slip to pick #49, then it is was 'taking too early' but nobody knows this so it is a moot point.  The team targeted a guy, and got the guy.  For 'that team' it was not top early.  A poor decision down the road? Possibly...  That is the point.  But fans?  They'll say he could have been taken at pick 100 etc...  Too Early and Reach stuff is what fans and media say, who have not spent nearly the time resources looking into every nook and cranny and all aspects of all the top players looking for the best fit into the organization.

 

"And taking Nick Chubb 6th overall (especially with Barkley available)  would be way, Way, WAY too soon." 

 

I hope we can agree on that....."

 

First, that isn't going to happen, and i cannot think of an example like that previously, can you?

 

I agree that as a consensus from top ex NFL personnel giving their opinions ( i have made no interviews not watched any tape ) would say it was a poor choice.  Fans say to early.  But for that team, they could not give two shakes of a lambs tail what the general fan thinks as far as finding the best players for their team.  That is truth.  But it could backfire opn them down the road.

 

3 hours ago, OffensivelyPC said:

Not to mention Chubb is not even worth a 2nd.

 

To each their own, but many ex NFL  talent evaluators disagree.  To me, I feel when so many are close in talent, the place they landed (Team culture, coaching, scheme, etc) determines just as much or more to their success than their talent/skills.  Time will tell on all of these, but Kareem Hunt and Alvin Kamara were taken in round 3... and they played like top 10 players. 

[FalseStart]

I like John Kelly. Mark Walton and Nyheim Hines later in the draft... No RBs until 4th...unless Guice at 36/37.

 

 

 

 

[tvturner]

3 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

Gil Brandt disagrees, and he is much more credit worthy in draft evaluation than you are.  He feels only Barkley (#1), and Guice (#30) above N. Chubb at #34.  The rest are lower.  

 

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000926642/article/hot-150-gil-brandts-topranked-prospects-for-2018-nfl-draft

And a lot of other evaluators don't have Chubb as the 3rd best RB..

 

 

[horseshoecrabs]

What turned out better for us passing on Rickey Williams in the draft or taking James instead? Willams was considered a cant miss. At the time I thought what are they doing but, I'm so glad I was wrong.

[ColtsBlueFL]

51 minutes ago, tvturner said:

And a lot of other evaluators don't have Chubb as the 3rd best RB..

 

 

 

Then we have to go by who has the better history over the years? Going to be tough to top the 'Godfather' of NFL scouting history.. Not all evaluators are the same either.

[ColtsBlueFL]

7 minutes ago, horseshoecrabs said:

What turned out better for us passing on Rickey Williams in the draft or taking James instead? Willams was considered a cant miss. At the time I thought what are they doing but, I'm so glad I was wrong.

 

I remember the Manning / Leaf debates.  Manning was the 'safe' choice. Leaf was the guy with the higher ceiling guy.  We still here those type comparisons about players to this day.

[Zoltan]

Frankly I don't think Nick Chubb has ever had the same explosiveness he had before his knee injury. I just don't see him being an every down back and at best a 3rd round pick. I also don't think we should pick a RB until pick 49 or pick 67 because I think there's a lot of good backs in this draft, and if we do what philly did with there RBs on offense it doesn't make sense to use a high draft pick.

[Zoltan]

2 hours ago, FalseStart said:

I like John Kelly. Mark Walton and Nyheim Hines later in the draft... No RBs until 4th...unless Guice at 36/37.

 

 

 

 

 

I'm a big fan of Walton he's coming off an Ankle injury, so he will drop which could make him a good player to take a risk on, but his best asset is he can pass block

[HectorRoberts]

19 hours ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

Name them, so we are all in the loop too...

 

There's no such thing as 'too early'. There is such a thing as 'too late', though.  If he gets taken before pick #49, or alternativley # 67, you're too late.

 

The deal is... if a 'guy' you (team/GM) want is on the board when it is your turn to select, and you don't' know for certain if he will be on the board on your next round turn... you go ahead get him if his name is next on  your draft board.  There's no 'too early'. But if you pass and he then comes off the board at #48 or earlier... you're 'too late'.  So GM's, coaches, and scouts graded everyone.  If his name is there when it is selection time, you turn in the card.  The fans and media scream 'reach! too early'.. etc.  but they didn't do all the work the scouts and team did in data collection and evaluation. Period.

I’m pretty sure if we drafted a kicker at #6 that would be “too early”

[HectorRoberts]

2 hours ago, FalseStart said:

I like John Kelly. Mark Walton and Nyheim Hines later in the draft... No RBs until 4th...unless Guice at 36/37.

 

 

 

 

I love Kelly! He’s one of my favorite players in the draft I think he’s a lot like Mack which is why I don’t see us going for him but I’ll definitely be following this kids career 

[HectorRoberts]

In my opinion it’s Barkley or bust when it comes to running backs in the top 3 rounds. Barkley is so talented that it would be crazy to pass on him if he fell to us but besides him no one else really stands out as a running back that warrants them to be a top 3 round Pick.

[FalseStart]

1 hour ago, HectorRoberts said:

I love Kelly! He’s one of my favorite players in the draft I think he’s a lot like Mack which is why I don’t see us going for him but I’ll definitely be following this kids career 

NFL network had Hines on... 70 catches, punt returner, fastest 40 among RBs, well spoken.., if we go Chubb... he would be a nice addition. Teammates with Chubb in college and pros

[ColtsBlueFL]

9 hours ago, HectorRoberts said:

I’m pretty sure if we drafted a kicker at #6 that would be “too early”

 

Here's the problem with your hypothetical... you don't name the kicker. 

 

My question to you, the Raiders took a kicker in round 1 of the 2000 draft, #17 overall.  Did they pick him too early? 

I remember gasps in Madison Square Garden, fans and media declared Davis loco.  Davis declared him their next Ray Guy. Others: way too early. That guy then became the face of their franchise for a long time, and I think he might play another season again this year.  Davis would now tell you, the media, and all others he proved he was absolutely worth the round 1 pick.  So the other part of the equation... time.  How does a selection work out for a team? 

[ColtsBlueFL]

9 hours ago, Zoltan said:

Frankly I don't think Nick Chubb has ever had the same explosiveness he had before his knee injury. I just don't see him being an every down back and at best a 3rd round pick. I also don't think we should pick a RB until pick 49 or pick 67 because I think there's a lot of good backs in this draft, and if we do what philly did with there RBs on offense it doesn't make sense to use a high draft pick.

 

I think i agree with this.  If you are not getting a top level game changer RB, then wait until later in the draft.  Maybe you get the next Kareem Hunt or Alvin Kamara.

[lollygagger8]

Rather have Guice or Michel

[LJpalmbeacher2]

No to rb chubb.

[ColtsBlueFL]

52 minutes ago, lollygagger8 said:

Rather have Guice or Michel

 

3 minutes ago, LJpalmbeacher2 said:

No to rb chubb.

 

Right, I want Ballard to find the Colts the next Kareem Hunt or Alvin Kamara...

[tvturner]

48 minutes ago, ColtsBlueFL said:

 

 

Right, I want Ballard to find the Colts the next Kareem Hunt or Alvin Kamara...

Which would be Ronald Jones

[MikeCurtis]

Just pick Penny in the middle of round 2 with the 49th pick.........

 

Call it a day

 

[ColtsBlueFL]

22 hours ago, tvturner said:

Which would be Ronald Jones

 

How was his  pro day? (I know his production is there though) Was he healed form his combine hammy injury?   Is he OK now?

 

And for those wanting Michel, why did he only start 11 games in 4 years? (Even though he ran for more yards than Gurley and Hearst)

 

I like the little red flags answered before I totally buy in.  I see others ask questions about prospects too.

[crazycolt1]

On ‎4‎/‎19‎/‎2018 at 1:29 PM, NewColtsFan said:

 

OK....

 

I've come up with another example,  and I think this one will resonate with you.    

 

Fast foward a week...   it's Day One of the draft,  and the Colts are on the clock with the 6th pick.     Three QB's, Chubb and Nelson have been taken.       So, the Colts are sitting there and Saquan Barkley is there for the taking....

 

Now, Commissioner Roger Goodell walks out to announce the Colts pick.    And there's NO trade,  we're picking a player.       And the Commissioner announces....

 

"With the 6th pick in the 2018 draft,  the Indianapolis Colts select..............    Running Back.......    Nick Chubb!"

 

You going to be OK with that?      You going to tell people here the Colts know what they're doing?     You going to defend this move?      I hope you're going to say no....

 

I'd be beyond furious.    As angry as I could be but I would not call for Ballard to be fired.    But many in the local media would --- that night.

 

If Ballard and his team have Chubb rated as the highest running back on their board,  you do NOT take him with the 6th pick, and certainly not ahead of Barkley.     Youd' sit and wait and take Chubb with pick 36.     You'd wait for a more reasonable pick to select him.    You have to have some feel for how the rest of the NFL views the same player.   

 

Not that you'd care,  but I'd put Chubb somewhere between pick 45-75.   I'd guess that's where most teams have him.

 

But you do not take him 6th overall.    Even if you think he's the best back.    There's an art to this.   You have to know how to work the draft.      And taking Nick Chubb 6th overall (especially with Barkley available)  would be way, Way, WAY too soon.   

 

I hope we can agree on that.....

That is not the scenario that Tdungy put down. He said a Chubb and Chubb draft. You have gone way out of your way to make a simple statement. If you think picking Nick Chubb earlier that you think he should go just say it. These long drawn out paragraphs you write does not change anyone's opinion.

No where did anyone say he should be taken at pick 6.

[crazycolt1]

23 hours ago, tvturner said:

Which would be Ronald Jones

Just out of curiosity why would we pick a RB in the 2nd round that don't have the frame to be a 3 down back?  We already have Mack and Jones is a similar type back. 

IMO we need a pounder, not a finesse type RB at this point.