Why Saquon Barkley should be our 2nd or third pick

[shasta519]

3 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

That’s actually a sound argument. It’s probably easier to find later round RBs than LTs and Edge Rushers. But the argument is based on positional value which I think is overstated. Especially when you’re picking top 5. We’re not just talking about any RB. We’re talking about a true elite, blue chip one that may indeed be a better prospect than Elliott, Fournette, or Gurley. We’re talking about the consensus best player in the entire draft, and he might be available at the third overall pick. You can’t pass on that for any other position except for QB, unless the grade is really close. But I don’t see Chubb for example, as the same tier of prospect as Barkley. Chubb is the best Edge guy in this class, but he’s not Barkley.

 

 You said there’s diminishing returns on lead backs as opposed to committees. There’s also diminishing returns on pass rushers like Chubb who get drafted high and are like 7 sacks a year guys who maybe have 1 or 2 10+ sack seasons. When you take Edge Rushers top 5, you’re looking for Von Miller’s (7 seasons, 6 with 10+ sacks and he only played 9 games in 2013). Not sure I see Chubb or any other projected 1st round Edge  rusher being that good.

 

If Chubb can churn out 7 sack seasons with a couple 10+ sack seasons mixed in, that's not a bad pick. In fact, that sounds an awful lot like Ezekiel Ansah or Melvin Ingram. One of those guys just got $16M/year and the other is about to get paid (if he even makes it to FA). A top 3 pick costs $7.5M/year on his rookie deal. That is considerable cap savings.

 

But pass rushers like that aren't readily available and/or are cost-prohibitive...as evidenced by the fact that the Colts are currently paying a player like Sheard nearly $9M.

 

With $16M in cap space, you could sign a top tier RB and draft Chubb...OR you could draft Barkeley and sign another Sheard. I am taking the former.

  

[richard pallo]

1 hour ago, crunked said:

So, you draft a 3 down back in Barkley, what do you do with Turbin and Mack? kind of makes Mack a wasted pick, not like you are going to trot him out on 3rd down to give Barkley a blow he is too small of frame to be a good pass protector consistently. Or do you take from Barkleys touches by trotting Mack out on 1st or 2nd down to get carries? Turbin....is he your 3rd down short yardage run pass option? Just doesn't jive to me.....Barkley is a great potential talent in the NFL, he would improve our talent level at the position......but it just seems we have giant chasms of need at other positions and this pick would top off a half full cup already........I would prefer we fill a chasm or two with other picks first before topping off this cup

 

Barclay can't play every snap.  Mack will get his touches.  It's a long season. Turbin and Mack are backups. 

[Defjamz26]

18 minutes ago, shastamasta said:

 

If Chubb can churn out 7 sack seasons with a couple 10+ sack seasons mixed in, that's not a bad pick. In fact, that sounds an awful lot like Ezekiel Ansah or Melvin Ingram. One of those guys just got $16M/year and the other is about to get paid (if he even makes it to FA).

 

Players like that aren't readily available...as evidenced by the fact that the Colts are currently paying Sheard more than they would a top 3 pick...to provide much less than that.   

Idk if that’s worth the number 3 overall pick though. I’d rather have the 1,000 yard RB who can also rack up 300+ yards receiving. Ansah and Ingram are good not elite pass rushers. At number 3 you’re looking for elite, not good.

[Coltsfanforlife12]

I still don’t get the love... he didn’t even lead college football in yards per carry or even rush yards... he was 23rd I. Rush yards...

[Superman]

10 hours ago, Bleedin Blue said:

Great pass rushers and guards can be found in rounds 2-4.

 

???

[Coltsfanforlife12]

16 minutes ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

I still don’t get the love... he didn’t even lead college football in yards per carry or even rush yards... he was 23rd I. Rush yards...

They guy who was close is Bryce Love and he’s projected as a second day guy...

[Superman]

20 hours ago, life long said:

Pound with the 230lbs Barkley, Mack as a fresh legged speedster coming off the bench. Turbin (or Gore) on short yards. Lets not forget they all can beat you receiving as well. 

 

I think you can replace Barkley with Guice, Penny, or Chubb, and all that you project for the offense would still be in play. 

[Superman]

19 hours ago, BOTT said:

While I agree he's not a slam dunk, I don't worry about scheme.  Even Venturi brushed off the idea of scheme fit in the modern NFL with the multiple front many teams use.

 

Werner's problem was he couldn't play dead regardless of scheme.

 

And it's very early to be worrying about scheme fit at this point. We don't even know what the scheme will be. 

[Superman]

3 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

That’s actually a sound argument. It’s probably easier to find later round RBs than LTs and Edge Rushers. But the argument is based on positional value which I think is overstated. Especially when you’re picking top 5. We’re not just talking about any RB. We’re talking about a true elite, blue chip one that may indeed be a better prospect than Elliott, Fournette, or Gurley. We’re talking about the consensus best player in the entire draft, and he might be available at the third overall pick. You can’t pass on that for any other position except for QB, unless the grade is really close. But I don’t see Chubb for example, as the same tier of prospect as Barkley. Chubb is the best Edge guy in this class, but he’s not Barkley.

 

You said there’s diminishing returns on lead backs as opposed to committees. There’s also diminishing returns on pass rushers like Chubb who get drafted high and are like 7 sacks a year guys who maybe have 1 or 2 10+ sack seasons. When you take Edge Rushers top 5, you’re looking for Von Miller’s (7 seasons, 6 with 10+ sacks and he only played 9 games in 2013). Not sure I see Chubb or any other projected 1st round Edge  rusher being that good.

 

First, let's separate legend from fact. Some people think Barkley is the best player in the draft, but it's not consensus. Even if it is...

 

Second, you might not agree with positional value, but there's a ton of evidence that QBs and pass rushers have more impact on wins/losses than any other positions, and there's a ton of evidence that even elite RBs don't impact wins and losses as much as above average DBs, pass protectors, LBs, and receivers. There's also a ton of evidence that even elite RBs last about half as long as good players at those other positions. That all combines for a compelling case that the RB position -- with respect to talent level -- is less valuable than any position other than interior OL, and I could make an argument for interior OL.

 

Since my whole intent is to maximize value, whether you agree with the above or not, hopefully you at least understand why I would pass on the 'consensus best player in the draft' when he's a RB.

 

Further, as I keep saying, set Chubb to the side. My argument is not Chubb over Barkley. It's 'don't take a RB at #3.' 

 

And lastly, if I do want Chubb at #3 -- and I haven't gone that far yet -- you can assume that I don't think he's a 7 sack/year kind of guy. We agree that a mediocre pass rusher isn't a good value at #3.

[stitches]

9 minutes ago, Superman said:

 

And it's very early to be worrying about scheme fit at this point. We don't even know what the scheme will be. 

Yeah, that's something I keep bringing up every time I see objections to drafting a 43 guy into our 34 system and roster. We don't have good enough front 7 for us to worry about changing the scheme. If the new DC wants to change the scheme I see no reason why we shouldn't. We don't have a monster linebacker that can only play in a 3-4 front. We don't have a monster nose that can only play in 3-4. There is no player on that front that is worth even taking into account about whether you change the system or not. If the new DC thinks 43 is a better way to go, I don't think Ballard would even think twice before he lets him do what he thinks is best for the team. 

[Superman]

41 minutes ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

I still don’t get the love... he didn’t even lead college football in yards per carry or even rush yards... he was 23rd I. Rush yards...

 

Watch the tape, not the stat sheet. Barkley is a monster.

[colts2dasuperbowl]

On 12/31/2017 at 7:36 AM, BProland85 said:

I'm referring to his athleticism and skill set. Unless he wows at the combine with Von Miller type athleticism, he could be just another pass rusher that had great stats in college but once he got to the NFL level he couldn't beat pro tackles with just technique and effort ala Bjoern Werner. 

This is how I thought of Joey Bosa. He's a stud now. I hope the same with Chubb. Some athletes don't show much athleticism on film but they have the instinct and are always on the ball.

[colts2dasuperbowl]

Any realistic possibility that we trade down couple spots and pick up Chubb and O-line in 1st rd?

[Crunked]

1 hour ago, richard pallo said:

Barclay can't play every snap.  Mack will get his touches.  It's a long season. Turbin and Mack are backups. 

If your #3 pick ain't on the field the vast majority of the time then why select him? And if he is on the field most of the time doesn't that make Mack a wasted pick?....put Nick Chubb with Mack and they do a 50-50 split and your golden.......its either waste Mack or waste the 3rd overall by making him situational, I would rather have a Edge rusher, or 2nd Safety or just about anything else....its just my 2 cents on the thought.

[shasta519]

1 hour ago, Defjamz26 said:

Idk if that’s worth the number 3 overall pick though. I’d rather have the 1,000 yard RB who can also rack up 300+ yards receiving. Ansah and Ingram are good not elite pass rushers. At number 3 you’re looking for elite, not good.

 

I think that is probably Chubb's floor...he has more upside than that. But if he only ends up being like Ansah and Ingram...it's not a bad pick. That type of production is costly...if you can even get it. 

 

But you can actually find a RB (or a RBC) to give you that type of production without using a top 5 pick.  

 

Ultimately, it doesn't have to be Chubb over Barkley...it could end up being Ferrell or some other pass rusher that Ballard loves. RB just isn't a position worth a top 5 pick.

 

 

 

 

[IinD]

We had 25 sacks total on D this year. That's 31st of 32 teams. 

 

We need a pass rusher. Watching the bowl games not knowing most of the names, but the Chubb kid from Georgia looked solid and so did the kid from LSU.

 

Grab one of those kids at #35 (or wherever our second pick is) and call it a day. Backfield in theory should be better. Maybe not Penn State kid great, but doable.

[stitches]

I just re-watched his career highlights...

 

There is nothing ordinary about this guy, I tell you. WOW. If we pick him my mind is going to be telling me "NOOOO", but my body's gonna be telling me "YEEEES".... I'm gonna be like:

 

 

 

His cuts are so sharp and insane... I kinda worry about his knees. No human being should be able to do some of the things he does. 

[krunk]

Penn State RB Saquon Barkley to be represented by Roc Nation

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/draft2018/story/_/id/21950882/jay-z-roc-nation-signs-penn-state-running-back-saquon-barkley

[Freenyfan102]

On 12/31/2017 at 9:45 AM, csmopar said:

If it was me..... yes

thank god your not a gm 

[csmopar]

3 minutes ago, Freenyfan102 said:

thank god your not a gm 

That maybe.  But i'm also thinking that its entirely possible that both Chubb and Barkley will be gone by the 3rd pick.  The best player left in my opinion if that were to happen would be Nelson and he feels a big need.

 

This is how I can see the 1st 4 picks going:

 

Browns grab Barkley

Giants grab Chubb

Colts either grab Nelson or trade back and grab him later

Browns grab one of the QBs that are rumored to be 1st rounders.  

[jshipp23]

1 hour ago, stitches said:

I just re-watched his career highlights...

 

There is nothing ordinary about this guy, I tell you. WOW. If we pick him my mind is going to be telling me "NOOOO", but my body's gonna be telling me "YEEEES".... I'm gonna be like:

 

 

 

His cuts are so sharp and insane... I kinda worry about his knees. No human being should be able to do some of the things he does. 

Has the quickest burst through the hole I've ever seen, but also has the Leveon Bell patience and vision, and Tomlinson like receiving ability. ....The Perfect RUNNING BACK...Makes Frank Gore look like he is running in slow motion in comparison , and he almost had 1,000 yards....just imagine the show we will see on Sundays... 

[jshipp23]

I don't think Browns or Giants will be dumb enough to pass on him unfortunately. .....

[life long]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think you can replace Barkley with Guice, Penny, or Chubb, and all that you project for the offense would still be in play. 

I do agree, if we pass, then i am still confident with this offense in a WC system..... with improved playcalling of course. Honestly i think McDaniels has a real shot, with Brissett likely talking up JM's offense. Obviously Luck would prolong his career by having more quick timing throws mixed in with his ability to create downfield. I am fi e with whoever we take as long as they can step in early and play. IMO production for a 1st year player is key for a top 10 pick. We can always find guys to develop at positions later in the draft. I really hope Ballard knows how to pick his teachers.... We had a guy who player played hard for, now we just need a guy to match that and add some better X's and O's.

[Fluke_33]

After watching Alabama on Monday, i think the Colts take Fitzpatrick if they don't trade down.  I'd rather them take a pass rusher but Fitzpatrick is too good to pass on.  

[DarkHorseColts]

2 hours ago, Superman said:

 

I think you can replace Barkley with Guice, Penny, or Chubb, and all that you project for the offense would still be in play. 

 

Nice to see Rashaad Penny get a mention with this group... don't see much hype on him yet.

[jshipp23]

7 minutes ago, DarkHorseColts said:

 

Nice to see Rashaad Penny get a mention with this group... don't see much hype on him yet.

I'll take the  Bo Jackson, Barry Sanders, Ladainian Tomlinson hybrid freak of nature....All Day long

[NewColtsFan]

19 minutes ago, jshipp23 said:

I'll take the  Bo Jackson, Barry Sanders, Ladainian Tomlinson hybrid freak of nature....All Day long

 

Who wouldn't?

 

Everybody would.     But those guys don't come along very often...    Maybe one every 10 years or so....

 

Until then...   you have to take who's available...

 

[George Peterson]

The offense can score enough points, especially with Luck, that a good defense can hold them in the game.  We are going to have to find value in the lower rounds if we want to compete and we can not plug all our holes out of the first three rounds so it comes down to whold the BPA is and where you're least willing to risk being disappointed.

 

Rather spend the top pick on defense, and look for value for the online in the mid rounds.  That's where I see our bggest need.  We can see improvement in this online without going he'll for leather at the very top of our draft stock.  If we can get a top RB, pass rusher or receiver we really need to do that and build out from there

[a06cc]

Andrew Luck is at his best off of play action. That’s all I’ll say.

[DraftMaster]

4 hours ago, Coltsfanforlife12 said:

I still don’t get the love... he didn’t even lead college football in yards per carry or even rush yards... he was 23rd I. Rush yards...

Bryce Love? No, but I think Barkley is the best RB in the draft I just don't think we should draft him.

[jshipp23]

19 minutes ago, a06cc said:

Andrew Luck is at his best off of play action. That’s all I’ll say.

It's over their heads.....lol..We need to draft a guard at 3, that will change everything...smh

[jshipp23]

1 hour ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Who wouldn't?

 

Everybody would.     But those guys don't come along very often...    Maybe one every 10 years or so....

 

Until then...   you have to take who's available...

 

This is the year NCF if we are very lucky....

[Bleedin Blue]

22 hours ago, Narcosys said:

 

 

I can show you highlights of trent richardson if you like to show you how truly special he was...

 

T-Rich was a physically gifted player with zero vision as a running back.  The only reason he was good at Alabama was his O-line.  Again, if you look at the tape you will see what I'm talking about Barkley is not the same guy.  Let's see how he does through the combine and with interviews.  Right now I see him as the BPA in this draft.

[Bleedin Blue]

11 hours ago, IinD said:

We had 25 sacks total on D this year. That's 31st of 32 teams. 

 

We need a pass rusher. Watching the bowl games not knowing most of the names, but the Chubb kid from Georgia looked solid and so did the kid from LSU.

 

Grab one of those kids at #35 (or wherever our second pick is) and call it a day. Backfield in theory should be better. Maybe not Penn State kid great, but doable.

 

No one is saying don't get a pass rusher, we're just saying don't pass on a kid that could be a superstar one day.  We're drafting at the top of every round, there will be plenty of opportunities to find a great pass rusher. Robert Mathis was drafted 138th for crying out loud.

[Bleedin Blue]

14 hours ago, Myles said:

I disagree with most of this.  

You can find any position if you accept "reasonable quality in the later rounds.  

What makes you think this offense can stand on its own?   The line is not good, WR's are not a solid group outside of Hilton.  Without Gore, the RB situation isn't proven. 

Having a home run hitting running back means that teams can't play us the same way as they did the first few years Luck was active.  Rushing four or five to kill Luck means exposing the defense to huge opportunities for Barkley.  Having a running threat also improves our passing game by forcing teams to stay out of nickel and dime formations. 

 

Finally, there is no guarantee that Luck comes back 100% on day one.  Having a powerful running game will give Luck options so he doesn't get killed again trying to carry the offense on his back. 

[Dark Superman]

If Sam Darnold doesn't declare for the Draft this year. I think Barkley definitely goes #2 to New York.

[crazycolt1]

33 minutes ago, Bleedin Blue said:

 

No one is saying don't get a pass rusher, we're just saying don't pass on a kid that could be a superstar one day.  We're drafting at the top of every round, there will be plenty of opportunities to find a great pass rusher. Robert Mathis was drafted 138th for crying out loud.

Yeah and Jeff Saturday was working at a hardware store when we signed him too. Those players are far and few between.

We are in need of multiple positions so no matter who is picked if they become a starter and contribute it is a good pick no matter the position.

Picking a RB is not as important as a pass rusher with this roster. Even trading down would be better and maybe getting a pass rusher and a good offensive lineman. We can't afford a luxury pick at RB when the trenches needs to be the priority.

[Narcosys]

1 hour ago, Bleedin Blue said:

 

T-Rich was a physically gifted player with zero vision as a running back.  The only reason he was good at Alabama was his O-line.  Again, if you look at the tape you will see what I'm talking about Barkley is not the same guy.  Let's see how he does through the combine and with interviews.  Right now I see him as the BPA in this draft.

And that's the same they said about TRich. No one is bust proof. Wait till he plays his 2nd and 3rd year and then we'll see.

[IinD]

8 hours ago, Bleedin Blue said:

 

No one is saying don't get a pass rusher, we're just saying don't pass on a kid that could be a superstar one day.  We're drafting at the top of every round, there will be plenty of opportunities to find a great pass rusher. Robert Mathis was drafted 138th for crying out loud.

I honestly wouldn't be opposed to it if we were even average on both the O and D line, but we are far from that.

 

He wouldn't do much with our guys blocking. 

 

If Ballard somehow goes out and gets a couple G's (good high priced ones) I could buy the idea. But right now, he'd probably average 50-75 HARD EARNED yds on this team per game. Not exactly getting much return on such high pick.

 

A pass rusher who even gets 7/8 Saks would be better then what we had this year. Sheard had 5 as our leader.

 

We used to have double digit guys on both sides on D. We sorely need that again. 

[crazycolt1]

8 hours ago, Bleedin Blue said:

Having a home run hitting running back means that teams can't play us the same way as they did the first few years Luck was active.  Rushing four or five to kill Luck means exposing the defense to huge opportunities for Barkley.  Having a running threat also improves our passing game by forcing teams to stay out of nickel and dime formations. 

 

Finally, there is no guarantee that Luck comes back 100% on day one.  Having a powerful running game will give Luck options so he doesn't get killed again trying to carry the offense on his back. 

There is a pretty good list of teams who had great RBs who never won a lot of games.

The Bears and Walter Peyton (finally won when getting a killer defense)

The Browns with Jim Brown (one championship in 1964)

The Lions with Barry Sanders

The Oilers with Earl Campbell

These are just a few. My point is without an all around good team a RB will not be successful. Right now we don't have a roster that supports a luxury pick at RB.