Why The Giants Will Not Take a Running Back in the First Round

[Treehugger]

The flaw with the original article is that it's only looking at rushing vs passing, not total production from an RB. A guy who's useful as a receiver out of the backfield, like Martin, has more value. It's the lower durability of RBs, and the "RB-by-committee" approach that has been pushing them out of the first round.

[mastershake]

I wouldn't be opposed if we draft a RB in the first round, especially if we get a guy like Doug Martin.

[Gman329]

But what makes much of the logic here meaningless is this quote from reese in Friday's Daily News: "The draft has nothing to do with who is on the team right now,” Reese said.

[gmenroc]

But what makes much of the logic here meaningless is this quote from reese in Friday's Daily News: "The draft has nothing to do with who is on the team right now,” Reese said.

 

Yes, but it COULD be about who's NOT on the team right now...ala Manningham, Jacobs, McKenzie or who MAY NOT be on the team next year...ala Osi, Kiwi, etc.

[Allstarjim]

Well, yeah, if you believe what GM's say right before a draft. I think they try to go best player first, and need second. So if there are guys that are very close in their evaluations, they will pick the guy at the position of need. So really what Reese is saying is mostly true. But roster holes aren't completely irrelevant in the draft, nobody is going to convince me otherwise. I highly doubt if Tannehill is available at pick 32 we take him.

[mastershake]

But what makes much of the logic here meaningless is this quote from reese in Friday's Daily News: "The draft has nothing to do with who is on the team right now,” Reese said.

 

I like the mentality, but I wonder if he actually believes that, and if it's actually true. He may just be saying it to posture. You never want to reveal your hand.

[BleedinBlue]

I like the mentality, but I wonder if he actually believes that, and if it's actually true. He may just be saying it to posture. You never want to reveal your hand.

The Giants' front office has always held their hand very close to their chest. The only time they laid all their cards on the table for the world to see is the year they got Eli and everyone in the country knew the Giants would do anything to get him.....and they did. Had they been a little more coy, they might not have had to pay such a heavy price though.

 

I'm sure Reese and TC have a couple of players they are really, really keen on in the first round.....but it'll be a mystery to the outside world until the little slip of paper is brought to the podium and it says, "with the 32 pick in the 2012 NFL draft, the New York Football Giants take Luke Kuechly, Linebacker out of Boston College". And then everyone screams, "whoooo", because we all expected someone else.

[Treehugger]

Well, yeah, if you believe what GM's say right before a draft. I think they try to go best player first, and need second. So if there are guys that are very close in their evaluations, they will pick the guy at the position of need. So really what Reese is saying is mostly true. But roster holes aren't completely irrelevant in the draft, nobody is going to convince me otherwise. I highly doubt if Tannehill is available at pick 32 we take him.

 

I agree, especially given the relatively low trade value of players in the NFL.

[CrazedDogs]

The Giants' front office has always held their hand very close to their chest. The only time they laid all their cards on the table for the world to see is the year they got Eli and everyone in the country knew the Giants would do anything to get him.....and they did. Had they been a little more coy, they might not have had to pay such a heavy price though.

 

Yeah, Ernie Accorsi went on and on about Eli for a year or two, all that time thinking he had too good of a team and therefore would never have the chance to draft early enough to get Eli.

[BleedinBlue]

The flaw with the original article is that it's only looking at rushing vs passing, not total production from an RB. A guy who's useful as a receiver out of the backfield, like Martin, has more value. It's the lower durability of RBs, and the "RB-by-committee" approach that has been pushing them out of the first round.

It was written in regards to the Cleveland Browns as everyone believes they are going to use their first round pick (4th overall) for a RB.

 

And I thought the author made a pretty valid argument that there are better ways to go. There was a Running Back a few years ago who won every possible award that a running back could get including two MVP's of the Rose Bowl, the Heismann Trophy, etc., etc. He broke all rushing records for college backs including Jim Brown's. He had better numbers than Peyton and more moves than Barry Sanders - he could break tackles, make electrifying moves, catch footballs like a WR, super fast, super strong, and basically an unstoppable machine if ever there was one. His name was Ron Dayne.

 

I still believe that if you want a great ground game, you must build the o-line for it first. The best running backs out there still need the holes to run through. There is no way in this day in age that a RB can do it all by himself....not the way faster stronger current NFL defenses know how to stop the run when it's in the game plan.

 

I just believe it's too big a risk to take a RB in the first round unless you've already put a line together built exclusively for a power running game.

[Treehugger]

It was written in regards to the Cleveland Browns as everyone believes they are going to use their first round pick (4th overall) for a RB.

 

And I thought the author made a pretty valid argument that there are better ways to go. There was a Running Back a few years ago who won every possible award that a running back could get including two MVP's of the Rose Bowl, the Heismann Trophy, etc., etc. He broke all rushing records for college backs including Jim Brown's. He had better numbers than Peyton and more moves than Barry Sanders - he could break tackles, make electrifying moves, catch footballs like a WR, super fast, super strong, and basically an unstoppable machine if ever there was one. His name was Ron Dayne.

 

I still believe that if you want a great ground game, you must build the o-line for it first. The best running backs out there still need the holes to run through. There is no way in this day in age that a RB can do it all by himself....not the way faster stronger current NFL defenses know how to stop the run when it's in the game plan.

 

I just believe it's too big a risk to take a RB in the first round unless you've already put a line together built exclusively for a power running game.

 

You could find an example of a Ron Dayne at every position though. The draft is a risk, period.

[Tempest]

Big difference between taking a RB at 4 for Cleveland Browns and NY Giants at 32.

 

I think its a big risk to start the 2012 season with Bradshaw, Ware and Scott.

[BleedinBlue]

Big difference between taking a RB at 4 for Cleveland Browns and NY Giants at 32.

 

I think its a big risk to start the 2012 season with Bradshaw, Ware and Scott.

 

I agree and I believe the Giants will take a RB and maybe even a second RB in the draft at the back end....not to mention, probably bring in a few UDFA RB's as well. Just don't think they'll burn their highest pick on a RB.

 

The first round all depends on the BPA and who the Giants have rated the highest. I still think they might trade down, but that will really piss me off if I stay up til midnight on Thursday waiting for the pick only to find out I have to wait another day.

[fishgutmartyr]

Ron Dayne

Tyrone Wheatley

Jarrod Bunch

Rodney Hampton

George Adams

Butch Woolfolk

 

These are your 1st round RB picks by the Giants since 1982. Other than Hampton, every single one of them was a bust: some, like George Adams, barely made an occasional visit to the field. That's 30 years of near-complete failure to get a decent return on a 1st round RB.

 

You'll excuse me if I'm a little gun-shy on RBs in the first round. Pick a Big 10 running back, and I'll be physically ill.

[mastershake]

Ron Dayne

Tyrone Wheatley

Jarrod Bunch

Rodney Hampton

George Adams

Butch Woolfolk

 

These are your 1st round RB picks by the Giants since 1982. Other than Hampton, every single one of them was a bust: some, like George Adams, barely made an occasional visit to the field. That's 30 years of near-complete failure to get a decent return on a 1st round RB.

 

You'll excuse me if I'm a little gun-shy on RBs in the first round. Pick a Big 10 running back, and I'll be physically ill.

 

Lesson learned.... big ten running backs never pan out, haha. Go SEC all day everyday on RBs.

[mastershake]

Check that, Adams was also SEC.

 

Still the success rate of our big ten backs is shittier.

[Allstarjim]

Fact, no RB in the top 10 in rushing in the NFL last year went to a Big 10 school. There were two Big Ten RB's in the Top 20 in rushing, Shonn Greene was 13th (Iowa), and Beanie Wells at 14th (Ohio State).

 

The SEC actually isn't all that well represented among RB's in the NFL... out of top 20 rushers, just teammates Arian Foster (Tennessee), and Ben Tate (Auburn) are SEC guys.

 

Nobody right now is better than the PAC-10 at churning out great RB's: Jones-Drew, Steven Jackson, and Marshawn Lynch are all Pac-10 guys, MJD led the NFL in rushing last year, with Lynch and S-Jax in the top 10. And then you have Reggie Bush who was 11th in the NFL in rushing last year (you read that right), also a Pac-10 guy of course, from USC.

 

So who's a PAC-10 guy in this draft? The top two RB's from the PAC-10 (wait, now PAC-12) are Chris Polk and LaMichael James.

 

And all that pretty much means nothing at all.

[mastershake]

I know Jim, I wasn't trying to make blanket a statement about SEC, Big Ten backs in general across the entire NFL... just when the giants draft them, Big Ten backs haven't panned out for us, haha.

 

Realistically, it's all just coincidence though that our draft busts RB's come from the Big Ten.

 

You can add onto the list Joe Montgomery from 99, Ohio State our 2nd round pick.

[fishgutmartyr]

I'm not even denying I'm being more superstitious than logical. It's just that traditionally, Big 10 offenses start with their lines, so the perception of the running backs in that conference would get kind of skewed. I don't know enough about the modern college game to know if that still holds true. But that has screwed us repeatedly over the years.

 

We have MUCH better luck drafting RBs in the second. And honestly, considering the shorter natural longevity and higher injury risk at that position, it's a better spot for that kind of pick. Now that I think about it, we've done better via trade and waiver wire than we have on first round picks (Otis Anderson, Derrick Ward--hell, Rob Carpenter).

 

By the way, considering two of our last three great backs were from Syracuse and Virginia, I don't know if the SEC is the way to go, either, lol.

[Allstarjim]

I know Jim, I wasn't trying to make blanket a statement about SEC, Big Ten backs in general across the entire NFL... just when the giants draft them, Big Ten backs haven't panned out for us, haha.

 

Realistically, it's all just coincidence though that our draft busts RB's come from the Big Ten.

 

You can add onto the list Joe Montgomery from 99, Ohio State our 2nd round pick.

 

I'm just here for the fun facts, V.

[Allstarjim]

I'm not even denying I'm being more superstitious than logical. It's just that traditionally, Big 10 offenses start with their lines, so the perception of the running backs in that conference would get kind of skewed. I don't know enough about the modern college game to know if that still holds true. But that has screwed us repeatedly over the years.

 

We have MUCH better luck drafting RBs in the second. And honestly, considering the shorter natural longevity and higher injury risk at that position, it's a better spot for that kind of pick. Now that I think about it, we've done better via trade and waiver wire than we have on first round picks (Otis Anderson, Derrick Ward--hell, Rob Carpenter).

 

By the way, considering two of our last three great backs were from Syracuse and Virginia, I don't know if the SEC is the way to go, either, lol.

 

Yeah, I think it is a position where there is a ton of value in the 2nd, historically, and this year as well. The only problem is that, again, or 1st rounder is basically an early 2nd... and our 2nd is a pick away from the 3rd round. So you have to ask yourself what the value is at those spots in the draft. At 63, there is much less value than at 32, because Doug Martin, Lamar Miller, and David Wilson at least is off the board, you would think. But Isaiah Pead might be a great fall back option. Maybe Chris Polk or Robert Turbin, also, but I'm not a big fan of those two guys.

 

If there was a re-draft, would you take Ray Rice at 32? I think that would be an amazing value. And that's who Martin compares to. But of course, that could be complete BS, too.

 

Last year, four RB's taken in the 2nd round. Ryan Williams (#38), Shane Vereen (#56), Mikel Leshoure (#57), and Daniel Thomas (#62). Williams and Leshoure's seasons were over before they started, having surgeries and going on IR. Vereen only played in 5 games and touched the ball about 15 times. Thomas was the most productive, but had a disappointing and injury-plagued year, averaged 3.5 yards a carry and 0 rushing TD's, but did get 581 yards.

 

I definitely see your point that it's a position that carries more injury risk than most others. One of the reasons I like Doug Martin is he has a little MJD in him, got that low center of gravity and he's thickly built, with a lot of strength.

 

I'm not sure if I want Doug Martin at 32, really. I'm still hoping that somehow, Fleener slides to our pick.

[Herc]

it's just a bad investment. they break down faster and they are a dime a dozen. it's not much more complex than that

[BleedinBlue]

it's just a bad investment. they break down faster and they are a dime a dozen. it's not much more complex than that

 

They break down faster because defenses are so much faster and stronger now that the RB takes a wicked beating and tacklers go for the knees. Defenses are so sophisticated anymore that it's next to impossible for a RB to carry a team on his back by running the ball over and over. The offensive line has so much to do with that and since everyone has put more emphasis on the air game, offensive lines are built more to protect the QB than to blow holes open for that hard fought 3 yard gain. The days of Walter Payton stiff arming his way through bigger players, or Jim Brown just running over defenders are over. It worked for awhile with Jacobs, but even as big and strong as he was, he started breaking down after a year or so. Workout regiments have made defenders exceedingly strong and they know how to tackle for injuries.

 

Great RB's aren't a dime a dozen.....but 90% of them are "plug and play" type players. You use them until they get hurt and plug in the next one.

[Herc]

i wasn't talking about great ones but i do think that rb is one of the easiest position to find late round (or undrafted) gems.

 

there are just way too many stories of no-names filling in for injured rb's and matching/exceeding their production. the new rookie slotting system makes it less of a risk but still, a first round pick would be better served on another position

[BleedinBlue]

i wasn't talking about great ones but i do think that rb is one of the easiest position to find late round (or undrafted) gems.

 

there are just way too many stories of no-names filling in for injured rb's and matching/exceeding their production. the new rookie slotting system makes it less of a risk but still, a first round pick would be better served on another position

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

I just read this and it fits with this conversation:

 

No first-round runners after Alabama’s RB

 

By Bob Glauber / Newsday

 

It wasn’t all that long ago — try 2008 — that the formula for drafting a running back was simple: If you projected him to be a consistent 1,000-yard rusher at the NFL level, you made him your first-round pick.

 

There were five running backs drafted in the first round that year, keeping with the notion that the position was highly valued. But with more and more teams using a pass-first attack, and with more teams finding quality runners lower in the draft — or even some who were never drafted at all, such as Houston’s Arian Foster — running backs are closer to dime-a-dozen category than blue chip. At least when it comes to draft-day positioning.

 

Consider: In the past three years combined, there have been only six first-round running backs, including one (Alabama’s Mark Ingram) last year.

 

And that trend is almost certain to continue this year, with Ingram’s former teammate, Trent Richardson, projected as the only first-rounder on Thursday night.

 

“Most teams try not to take us like they used to in the first round,” Richardson said. “Hopefully I can change that, or more guys in this draft can change that.”

 

Richardson will certainly get that chance, because he’s almost certain to be taken near the top of the draft, perhaps as high as No. 4 to Cleveland. And who knows? Maybe there’s a team willing to trade a bunch of picks to move up and grab Richardson, who appears to be as close to a can’t-miss prospect as Minnesota’s Adrian Peterson, the seventh overall pick in 2007.