National title game is why you can't take Barkley 3rd

[Yoshinator]

6 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

It’s a recent trend that only exists because those teams miss out on the first round RBs. I don’t think they sat there and said “Leonard Fournette? Pshhh, I’ll get a guy in the 3rd round better than him”. Now they missed out and followed BPA and got lucky. I don’t think anyone expected Howard and Hunt to be stars. If they did they would have gone in the first round. That isn’t strategy, just getting lucky with low risk, high reward picks. Much like a Nate Hairston for example. I don’t think Ballard passed on a bunch of elite slot CBs because he knew he could find something in the 5th round.

There are plenty more than that. Leveon Bell is a 2nd round pick. David Johnson was a third round pick, Alvin Kamara 2nd round pick, Howard 5th, Hunt 3rd, Lesean McCoy 2nd round, plenty of others guys like Alex Collins, Jamaal Williams, Jay Ajayi, and Kenyan Drake are 5th round guys. The reason that rbs are so successful so late in the draft is because they are easy to find. The success rate is high, the transition is easy. There are 3-5 RBs who are immediate starters and turn out to be very good players in every draft. You can't say that for pass rusher or O-Line. RB is an easy position to fill and position scarcity says to draft one later. A pass rusher like Chubb isn't going to come along later. If Ballard does his homework, he'll find an RB later on (whether it be one round later or more), that is comparable to Barkley in the draft. Even UDFA's have a decent success rate for RB's.

[Yoshinator]

7 minutes ago, akcolt said:

As far as Ballard and Hunt go we took Basham in the 3rd at a position of need We don't know where Hunt was on Ballards board but with Gore on the roster it wasn't a big hole for 2017. We need a pass rushing Edge and you get a developmental project at that position in the 3rd round.  I thought/think Mack was good value at the end of the 4th.  Let's not forget  KC was looking like a time share prior to the knee injury to Ware. .

 

As far as starters later in the draft pass rushers and OT's are not typically found throughout the draft.  When you talk about other positions like interior OL WR's etc  I think you will find them scattered but with any position most of the top players are going to be higher picks in today's NFL.   That is true of RB's too all you have to do is look at the leading rushers from this year to see it. 

A lot of the top guys are 2nd and 3rd picks like Leveon Bell, David Johnson, Kareem Hunt, Derrick Henry, Lesean McCoy and others. There are also lots of 4th and 5th round picks that are easy 1,000 yd+ rushers that contribute a lot more than a depth pick at a premium position. Even though the 1st round picks at RB and something like OLB may have similar production, the difference between a depth LBer and a 1,000 yd rusher in the 4th-5th round is huge, and what separates position scarcity. That's what smart GM's know, and that's how they build winning teams. It's also the tactic Chris Ballard should use to maximize talent on a team so devoid of talent.

[NewColtsFan]

17 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

It’s a recent trend that only exists because those teams miss out on the first round RBs. I don’t think they sat there and said “Leonard Fournette? Pshhh, I’ll get a guy in the 3rd round better than him”. Now they missed out and followed BPA and got lucky. I don’t think anyone expected Howard and Hunt to be stars. If they did they would have gone in the first round. That isn’t strategy, just getting lucky with low risk, high reward picks. Much like a Nate Hairston for example. I don’t think Ballard passed on a bunch of elite slot CBs because he knew he could find something in the 5th round.

 

Theyre not passing on the Fournettes or Elliott's of the world thinking they're going to find better.

 

But they think they'll find someone who can do the job they want.   They're saving their top picks for premium positions.   Most teams don't view RB as a premium position anymore.    This is the new normal in the NFL with the heavy emphasis on passing.

[crazycolt1]

1 hour ago, NannyMcafee said:

 

Mid the giants take Barkley then the 3rd pick just got that much more valuable 

I agree with that for sure.

[dgambill]

37 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I just think you guys are making drafting to calculated and principle based. There aren’t these super strict guidelines to drafting that you absolutely must adhere to. Your goal is to fill the roster with as many elite players as possible. The only positions this doesn’t apply too are P, K, and fullback. You take elite prospects wherever regardless of what production could possibly be had from another prospect. Besides, that’s not even how GMs Think. They don’t compare Elliot’s rushing numbers and draft position of that of Kareem Hunt to justify where to take a RB. It’s not a compare and contrast league.

 

You don’t know for certain that Rashad Penny or Nick Chubb are going to be late round steals. Heck, you don’t even know when they’ll be available. But you know that Barkley, given his level of competition, elite production, and exceptional measurables has the best shot of being dominant at his position. And he’ll likely be BPA. That’s how you draft. Very rarely to you get elite, blue chip players in later rounds. And trying to play the waiting game is a fools game. Good RBs just aren’t hung up on some type of late round discount rack where everyone can see and take them as they please. 

All I was saying was the position is not valued the same as say edge rusher or left tackle or corner back...heck not even wide receiver because of how picks are distributed over time. The reason for this is because gms feel like the difference between elite level talent at the rb position is not that much different than a good running back. They feel it is more scheme, OL, and play calling that is the main reason for success in the running game as opposed to the back. That is why teams like Denver could churn out 1000 yd rusher no matter what their name was. Sure there are those talents that can make a little more out of a play or something out of nothing but most teams just don't put that extra value as worthy of spending that high pick. Certainly some teams do...and I think a lot of that is based on their priority on running the ball and how they have built their team. Combine that to the fact that for the most part running backs have a short shelf life as well....hard to invest in a guy that might not even sign a second contract with you. I definitely think GMs consider position when evaluating a player...I know they do when paying one...so why wouldn't they use those same considerations when drafting. I agree you want special talent on your team...no matter what position...but if your in the top 5...there is probably more than one player you project to be a special talent...so your going to likely take the one at the position of most value....typically not RB.  

[Steamboat_Shaun]

12 hours ago, Tsarquise said:

Isn't it bad to take a running back high? 

 

Allegedly.

[Defjamz26]

10 minutes ago, NewColtsFan said:

 

Theyre not passing on the Fournettes or Elliott's of the world thinking they're going to find better.

 

But they think they'll find someone who can do the job they want.   They're saving their top picks for premium positions.   Most teams don't view RB as a premium position anymore.    This is the new normal in the NFL with the heavy emphasis on passing.

I don’t think that’s necessarily true. We don’t see guys like Elliott, Fournette, McCaffery, or Gurley falling out of the top 10 or even the first round. It’s hard to judge but most of the teams that have a need for that type of back but don’t get a shot at those guys. QBs and Myles Garrett-like pass rushers will always be more valuable, but if a RB is BPA on a teams board he usually gets taken high in the first round. RB is still a premium position. Late round successes don’t change that.

[NewColtsFan]

6 minutes ago, Defjamz26 said:

I don’t think that’s necessarily true. We don’t see guys like Elliott, Fournette, McCaffery, or Gurley falling out of the top 10 or even the first round. It’s hard to judge but most of the teams that have a need for that type of back but don’t get a shot at those guys. QBs and Myles Garrett-like pass rushers will always be more valuable, but if a RB is BPA on a teams board he usually gets taken high in the first round. RB is still a premium position. Late round successes don’t change that.

 

I said most teams.....

 

Not all teams...

 

[jameszeigler834]

12 hours ago, 2006Coltsbestever said:

I get what you are saying but Barkley is better than anyone playing tonight. I like Chubb and Michel but they aren't Barkley.

Barkley is the best RB prospect  in the last two drafts and a major difference maker our offense if luck is able to play will be a dynamic threat with Luck Hilton and Barkley and whoever our new number 2 receiver would be. Teams if we drafted barkley wouldn't be able to just focus on stopping luck anymore they would have to watch out for Barkley too.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

12 hours ago, Tsarquise said:

Is he really that good? I don't know anything about him. Who would you compare him to?

 

Lesean McCoy.

[jameszeigler834]

Their is not a RB in this draft more valuable than Barkley period if he is there we have to take him.

[NannyMcafee]

35 minutes ago, crazycolt1 said:

I agree with that for sure.

 

Cant say I would complain. 

[Defjamz26]

Just now, NewColtsFan said:

 

I said most teams.....

 

Not all teams...

 

Yeah I missed that part. But idk about “most”. I could think of maybe 4 or so teams. The Pats are one because B.B. can scheme almost anyone to be successful and uses a committee approach to a lot of positions. The Chiefs are another because Andy Reid has never drafted RBs high. Westbrook was a 3rd round pick, Shady a 2nd, and Hunt a 3rd. The Eagles because Pederson is from the Reid tree and seems to share the same sentiment. I’m tempted to say the 49ers because Shannahan, much like his father, has had success with later round RBs (Freeman in Atlanta and Morris in Washington). Perhaps the Dolphins since Gase got production out of Ajayi and Drake. That’s maybe 5 teams. But whose to say the 49ers wouldn’t draft Barkley if he was there. I respect your argument though, as you’ve presented it way better than some of the other posters claiming the same. And I think that’s where the truth lies: somewhere between both our assertions. RB is a devalued position for some teams, but most teams will still take an elite RB high.

[shakedownstreet]

1 hour ago, Jared Jammer said:

The thought of seeing Luck play next to an all-world running back for the next 5-10 years excites me more than any woman ever could.

 

I-I-I g-got to g-go to the bathroom!

[Mr.Debonair]

32 minutes ago, Steamboat_Shaun said:

 

Lesean McCoy.

He’s bigger than McCoy. I’d say more Zeke Elliott 

[JMichael557]

The Hunt argument shows why you take Barkley. In the 3rd round we took the "needed" pass rusher Basham over the better player Hunt. Now everyone says that Ballard should have taken Hunt the better player over Basham the "pass rusher".  The same holds true this year. If Barkley is the best player in the draft you select him over a position of greater need. In order to have good team you need to have the best players. 

[luv_pony_express]

14 hours ago, Tsarquise said:

Isn't it bad to take a running back high? 

 

Seems like a lot of busts at RB.

 

IMO, if we had a great OL, we could afford to merely have a good RB.  Every play starts up front -- which is the single biggest (though not the only) reason we haven't been very good in quite some time.

[NewColtsFan]

2 hours ago, Defjamz26 said:

Yeah I missed that part. But idk about “most”. I could think of maybe 4 or so teams. The Pats are one because B.B. can scheme almost anyone to be successful and uses a committee approach to a lot of positions. The Chiefs are another because Andy Reid has never drafted RBs high. Westbrook was a 3rd round pick, Shady a 2nd, and Hunt a 3rd. The Eagles because Pederson is from the Reid tree and seems to share the same sentiment. I’m tempted to say the 49ers because Shannahan, much like his father, has had success with later round RBs (Freeman in Atlanta and Morris in Washington). Perhaps the Dolphins since Gase got production out of Ajayi and Drake. That’s maybe 5 teams. But whose to say the 49ers wouldn’t draft Barkley if he was there. I respect your argument though, as you’ve presented it way better than some of the other posters claiming the same. And I think that’s where the truth lies: somewhere between both our assertions. RB is a devalued position for some teams, but most teams will still take an elite RB high.

 

I guess it depends on how you define...   "high"....

 

Top 5...     top 10....    1st round?....

 

Everyone is different.

 

[Dark Superman]

So the Colts shouldn't take Barkley because of what happened in the National Championship game?

A game in which Saquon Barkley didn't play in? What?

 

You should go watch some highlights of this kid then.. he plays half-back for the Penn State Nittany Lions. He wears #26.

 

No, no, Penn State.. not Alabama.

 

No, PENN STATE! You know the Nittany Lions? The home of Joe Paterno! Happy Valley?

 

No, not the Georgia Bulldogs.

 

I give up.

 

*Waves the white flag*

[DaColts85]

4 hours ago, Jared Cisneros said:

Ballard didn't take Hunt in the 3rd and took Mack in the 4th, that was a blunder by him, whether it was poor scouting on Hunt or just poor judgment on his potential, he was wrong, and that was significant. Grigson had numerous misses everywhere, yes, I'm just referring to his RB misses. 

 

Don't give me the "I could say that about every position when comparing what position hits in later rounds." You, I, and anyone worth their weight in salt know good and well there are much more hits and many more starters at RB than positions like O-Line and Pass rushers in the mid/late rounds. That's a fact. GM's use that tactic a lot (even more so in these two years where RB is deep) to choose positions where you almost have to take early round picks (like O-Line, Pass Rusher, CB) to get an elite player the majority of the time, and use their later round picks to get positions such as RB and WR. This gives them a long term advantage the more they do it. There's a reason we don't hit on defense, and even O-Line to an extent besides Kelly and Constanzo from 2011. You have to know position scarcity as well as great scouting and BPA. A lot goes into being a GM strategy-wise, including taking one player in the first round to set up your second round pick. Hopefully Ballard is playing chess while other GM's are playing checkers.

This is extremely true among good GM's.  You take the value of the player and look at the drop off after that player.  Right now Bradley Chubb is a good example of this.  If he is graded as a 10 and the next best is a 7 but you have many OL or whatever rated within 1 or 2 then Chubb is your guy.  The value is there.

[Steamboat_Shaun]

5 hours ago, Mr.Debonair said:

He’s bigger than McCoy. I’d say more Zeke Elliott 

 

Yeah, I guess I was referring more to running style, especially in the open field. But from a strictly size standpoint, he's definitely bigger than Shady.

[Malakai432]

18 hours ago, BleedBlu8792 said:

 

Not even close... Barkley is ~20lbs heavier than LT ever was... 

 

Bigger, stronger, faster, with good vision? I'll take that!

[lance_m8]

10 hours ago, JMichael557 said:

 

This is what a great back does. The defense has to gameplan for the back. This affects what they can do on defense. It affects pass rush because if you overrun a lane and it a draw then you get hit for a big play. LBers who respect the run cannot drop into coverage leaving better passing lanes. Also a great back can pick up blitzing linemen or swing out of the backfield to catch a pass also trying up LBers. This is just a few things that a great back does over a good or average back. 

I understand what having a great back does do not get me wrong I would love to have the guy wearing the blue and white but that means wew put all our problems on hold another year unless ballard balls out in free agency

[lance_m8]

11 hours ago, UKColt13 said:

 

We can make the line a whole lot better by signing Norwell/Pugh or even both if we want to throw money at them in FA. We have the 3rd pick in the 2nd round too so we can select another Olineman there.

 

I'm not commenting on the likelihood of the scenarios but there are ways we could fix the line, draft an elite level RB, get Luck back back healthy, find an OC that can use Mack effectively, and have a top 5 offense next year.

 

I agree the priority is Oline this year (finally protect #12). But there are ways of doing that that don't include using a #3 pick on a G. Right now the pick is wide open. I wouldn't rule out Minkah Fitzpatrick at #3 either. Dude is good.

I rather have fitz than barkley 

[lance_m8]

10 hours ago, akcolt said:

You do realize we will do more then just get one guy from the draft? We could take Barkley and fix the OL later in the draft and in FA. We would be able to address ILB in the draft WR2 in FA etc. The point being we can draft Barkley and still check the other boxes. You do realize Frank Gore was 12th in the NFL in rushing this season and averaged over 3.5 ypc? 

 

If Barkley runs like he is supposed to at the combine he will be the best RB prospect in recent memory. A RB that's 230 lbs runs a 4.3 40 and has the wiggle he possesses is rare. That's not taking into consideration his receiving skills or KO return ability. The guy is Reggie Bush in the open field there really hasn't been anyone like him.  He will be difficult to pass on and very well could be the selection if we stay at #3 

 

It will be difficult to find an Edge that can really get after the QB beyond the 1st round. I personally would take Chubb if he checks out or drop back accumulate picks and take Key, Laundry or the pass rusher Ballard identifies. Then we could add a RB later I like Penny, Michel Freeman or Chubb. The RB class is a deep again but Barkley has all the makings of a great one. He's never been injured and has the ideal size to for a long career. 

you are implying that ballard has a perfect free agency and fills every hole and then takes a superstar for the cherry on top 

[DougDew]

13 hours ago, crazycolt1 said:

IMO Barkley don't make it to 3rd.  I think the Giants take him at 2. The Giants didn't even have a RB that would make another teams roster last year.  Add the fact that Mara has already said he wanted Eli to be his starter next season.

Could Mara been sending a smoke screen? Maybe, maybe not.

That is a possibility. I don't think any of the QBs coming out are similar to the quality of Eli Manning when he came out.  Point being that if you pair Barkley with an aged Manning, the team is probably better off than selecting one of the rookies without any other good players.

 

And Manning probably hasn't regressed much.  I think this year it was more about the team and the head coach.

 

Or if Chubb is the next JPP or Michael Strahan, there is that possibility too.

[crazycolt1]

3 minutes ago, DougDew said:

That is a possibility. I don't think any of the QBs coming out are similar to the quality of Eli Manning when he came out.  Point being that if you pair Barkley with an aged Manning, the team is probably better off than selecting one of the rookies without any other good players.

 

And Manning probably hasn't regressed much.  I think this year it was more about the team and the head coach.

 

Or if Chubb is the next JPP or Michael Strahan, there is that possibility too.

I think there is truth to what you say about Eli. He was without his top two receivers and no running game. Put those two issues back into play and the Giants could very well be a scary team.