Chances of finding a starting RB in the draft

[Kaiser]

I would expect the running game to regress quite a bit with this approach.

DeMarco was a 3rd round pick, we seem to have done OK with him carrying the rock.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

DeMarco was a 3rd round pick, we seem to have done OK with him carrying the rock.

Agreed.

I'm not about to wave the surrender flag with a different back in there.

I don't see the teams average of 4.2 ypc being a daunting number to try to achieve.

Mostly it's the 30 carries per game.

If the team commits to run game they'll move the football that way, just like last year.

But if all of a sudden they start running it 22 times a game and the APC is still 4.2 then it's not the back(s).

 

[gimmesix]

The only thing I've seen posted from somebody else that watched the game footage was a review that Fuzzy did. He got into the specifics of exactly which OLinemen were in the game, etc.. His review was positive for McFadden and he's generally not a happy fan.

Obviously, they can't be overly dependent on McFadden, if for no other reason than his injury history; however, between McFadden, Ryan Williams and Randle, they all have a chance to be productive behind this OL in this offense. The probability of any one of them being productive is probably similar to the probability of a rookie being productive. When you add together the probability that just 1 of them steps up, then it is much higher the individual probability for each one.

There is also the issue of Pass Pro. How much will a rookie be held back for this issue. McFadden is terrific in Pass Pro (better than Murray). Despite claims otherwise, Randle was good in Pass Pro in 2014 including the Preseason. The reports are that they spent the year teaching Ryan Williams better Pass Pro technique.

I don't know how to define overly dependent. Usually, even in a committee approach, one back carries the bulk of the load. Do we have a guy who can do that? The only one who has proven that he can is McFadden, but with him we have the issue of the poor YPC the past three seasons. It will just surprise me if we have 300 carries next year that it's split equally among three backs. One of them most likely is going to end up closer to 200 carries, but do we have one who can carry that load and succeed? I wish I had clear evidence that we do, but we're doing a lot of projecting beyond what any numbers we have show. Dave Campo believes he can because of his vision (which others have panned) and his speed. He said he lacks the physicalness of Murray, though.

I do agree on the importance of pass protection and McFadden's strength there.

 

[jday]

Obviously, we don't know. The only thing we can look at is the evidence we've got. But from what I understand about the running back position from a historical draft standpoint, what we see here holds up pretty well across time.

I saw a study (and can't find it now) over 10 years that showed that 59 percent of running backs drafted in the first round and 25 percent in the second round became starters. Another 10-year study (through 2009 ... I think the other was more recent) showed 58 percent in the first round and 36 in the second, I believe it was, became starters. (The rate drops into the teens after those rounds.)

I have trouble believing that that all comes down to the quality of the line. The first study said that running backs have either one of the highest or the highest "bust" rates in the draft, although obviously there are busts at every position each year.

And again, that doesn't mean we don't draft one because we've got to have one IMO. It's just that finding the ones who will succeed isn't easy.

I honestly believe the Cowboys should draft a running back high in the upcoming draft, regardless of the fact that most RB's across the NFL would probably run for over 1,000 behind the Cowboys offensive line.

 

[jday]

Actually, I beleive in the end it was less than 900 yards gained before contact. It was really high early on but went down as defenses started contributing more resources to trying to stop the run. PFF actually had him at like 950 yds after contact, which was really high. They also had him with like 55-60 broken tackles, which was among the highest in the league. The OL was great, but some are really diminishing what Murray did. I do think the running back that Dallas chooses has an excellent chance to be among the league leaders and should have a great shot at rookie of the year but let's not make it like anyone could have done what Murray did.

I read over 1,000 somewhere, not sure where. Don't get me wrong, though, I'm not trying to detract from what Murray accomplished nor am I saying you can plug just anyone in and expect similar results. I am actually hoping the Cowboys draft a RB high in the upcoming draft. My initial response was merely pointing out the issue with attempting to directly tie a connection between where a player is drafted to their production. Certain systems can make a RB look much better than what they really are.

 

[MichaelWinicki]

I don't know how to define overly dependent. Usually, even in a committee approach, one back carries the bulk of the load. Do we have a guy who can do that? The only one who has proven that he can is McFadden, but with him we have the issue of the poor YPC the past three seasons. It will just surprise me if we have 300 carries next year that it's split equally among three backs. One of them most likely is going to end up closer to 200 carries, but do we have one who can carry that load and succeed? I wish I had clear evidence that we do, but we're doing a lot of projecting beyond what any numbers we have show. Dave Campo believes he can because of his vision (which others have panned) and his speed. He said he lacks the physicalness of Murray, though.

I do agree on the importance of pass protection and McFadden's strength there.

Agreed.

I think you're going to see the Cowboys use much more of a running-back-by-committee thing this season... and it will be like:

(based on 30 carries per game)

Guy "A" - 18 (last season Murray average 24.5 carries per game)
Guy "B" - 6
Guy "C" - 3
"Various" - 3

 

[gimmesix]

Agreed.

I think you're going to see the Cowboys use much more of a running-back-by-committee thing this season... and it will be like:

(based on 30 carries per game)

Guy "A" - 18 (last season Murray average 24.5 carries per game)
Guy "B" - 6
Guy "C" - 3
"Various" - 3

Murray averaging so much also makes me wonder about the other backs we had, including Randle. I don't know if the Cowboys staff was just stupid in not giving the other backs more carries or if they had legitimate reasons to run Murray into the ground. I don't think the intention is ever to give one back that many carries, but you also don't want to take a back who clearly is far superior to the others off the field that much.

 

[gimmesix]

I honestly believe the Cowboys should draft a running back high in the upcoming draft, regardless of the fact that most RB's across the NFL would probably run for over 1,000 behind the Cowboys offensive line.

If I believed for certain that the backs on our roster could run for more than 1,000 yards behind this line (with a 4.0-plus average), I'd be against Dallas drafting a running back high. I'm for drafting one high because I don't know that.

Based on what I've presented here, I don't know if the back we draft high will be able to do that, but I'm certainly for adding one of the ones considered the best in this draft to the equation.

Between a first- or second-round pick McFadden, Williams, Randle and Dunbar hopefully we can find one or two who can keep this running game going. (I was even for adding Stevan Ridley after signing McFadden for the same reason.)

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Murray averaging so much also makes me wonder about the other backs we had, including Randle. I don't know if the Cowboys staff was just stupid in not giving the other backs more carries or if they had legitimate reasons to run Murray into the ground. I don't think the intention is ever to give one back that many carries, but you also don't want to take a back who clearly is far superior to the others off the field that much.

I don't think they were stupid. I just don't think they knew how to manage the carries.

This type of offense was new to all of them.

I also think they took into consideration that this was Murray's contract year and they were going to run him into the ground.

Randle did fine last year. 51 carries, 343 yards, 3 scores. It wasn't like he was blown out of the water.

 

[gimmesix]

I don't think they were stupid. I just don't think they knew how to manage the carries.

This type of offense was new to all of them.

I also think they took into consideration that this was Murray's contract year and they were going to run him into the ground.

Randle did fine last year. 51 carries, 343 yards, 3 scores. It wasn't like he was blown out of the water.

No, I agree on Randle's numbers. They were quite good. That's why it made little sense to give him as few carries as they did. That keeps us from knowing how he'll do if he has to carry more of the load. What would going from 51 to 151 do to his average with defenses focusing on him instead of Murray? If he can be kept in the role he had, we've got evidence he'll be fine, if he doesn't revert to the back he was the previous year.

Maybe you're right on not knowing how to manage the carries, but that's pretty pitiful if true.

 

[jday]

If I believed for certain that the backs on our roster could run for more than 1,000 yards behind this line (with a 4.0-plus average), I'd be against Dallas drafting a running back high. I'm for drafting one high because I don't know that.

Based on what I've presented here, I don't know if the back we draft high will be able to do that, but I'm certainly for adding one of the ones considered the best in this draft to the equation.

Between a first- or second-round pick McFadden, Williams, Randle and Dunbar hopefully we can find one or two who can keep this running game going. (I was even for adding Stevan Ridley after signing McFadden for the same reason.)

I'm actually with you on that. Like you, I'm not confident in what the Cowboys have back there and based on their pre-draft visits neither is the Cowboys brass. If you consider that everything the Cowboys did well last year stemmed from the running game, drafting a running back and doing so early is a must.

Having said that, there will be running back's taken late that will still have successful, possibly even pro bowl caliber careers...and much of that truly depends on the offensive line they play behind. Again, I'm not suggesting the Cowboys roll the dice anyone...if they are planning on doing that they may as well stick with what they have.

 

[Kaiser]

I don't see the teams average of 4.2 ypc being a daunting number to try to achieve.

It isn't hard to get a very good RB in the 2nd or 3rd round, beyond DeMarco there are plenty of examples like Jamaal Charles and LeSean McCoy. It isn't easy to hit on the right player but the Dallas scouts have earned the benefit of the doubt with the last three drafts.

Also you didn't really see long breakaway runs last year, DeMarco had a few 30 yarders and Randle one or two, but you really didn't see the home run play by a RB. McFadden still has to speed to do that when our OL gives him an enormous hole to run through.

Also Dunbar did very little last year when they wanted him to assume a Reggie Bush type of role. I think they will bring competition for Dunbar to camp from a draft pick or late signing. If you really got the level of play they wanted from that change of pace RB, its a huge boost to the position as well.

 

[XxTDxX]

Lot of these guys got drafted to teams with little to no weapons, bad QB play, bad O-Line play, or a combination of these things. The Cowboys have a unique give a young RB a chance to come in with much less pressure and a much easier job.

 

[gimmesix]

Having said that, there will be running back's taken late that will still have successful, possibly even pro bowl caliber careers...and much of that truly depends on the offensive line they play behind. Again, I'm not suggesting the Cowboys roll the dice anyone...if they are planning on doing that they may as well stick with what they have.

I don't disagree with that. Every year at every position there are players taken who defy the odds for a variety of reasons. Would love to luck into an Alfred Morris like Washington did in the sixth round in 2012.

Honestly, I know some will hate this, but I'm not opposed to using two picks on this position because of my belief that it is vital to the identity we established last season. I wouldn't want to use a first in that case, but I could live with spending a second on a running back then turning around and using a sixth on the position. In that scenario, I might could even live with Dallas using a third and sixth, knowing that the team at least gave itself a couple of shots at finding one.

If the depth is what everyone believes it to be in this draft, then it's possible Dallas will be able to get one of these backs that some like as much as the top ones later in the draft. I'm not for risking the future of the position on a sixth-rounder alone, though. (Maybe the second one would also have some return ability, so we can effectively replace Harris, too.)

 

[gimmesix]

Also you didn't really see long breakaway runs last year, DeMarco had a few 30 yarders and Randle one or two, but you really didn't see the home run play by a RB. McFadden still has to speed to do that when our OL gives him an enormous hole to run through.

I care less about the long, breakaway runs than many on this board seem to. Give me a starting back who can consistently get 4 or 5 yards (like Murray did) over one who can hit the home run but strikes out down to down. I believe Dallas feels the same way because of what Garrett said about not wanting to lose the physical aspect of the running game.

It's nice to have both, but it's more important to have that running game that wears out a defense because it can't stop him from consistently making first downs.

 

[jday]

I don't disagree with that. Every year at every position there are players taken who defy the odds for a variety of reasons. Would love to luck into an Alfred Morris like Washington did in the sixth round in 2012.

Honestly, I know some will hate this, but I'm not opposed to using two picks on this position because of my belief that it is vital to the identity we established last season. I wouldn't want to use a first in that case, but I could live with spending a second on a running back then turning around and using a sixth on the position. In that scenario, I might could even live with Dallas using a third and sixth, knowing that the team at least gave itself a couple of shots at finding one.

If the depth is what everyone believes it to be in this draft, then it's possible Dallas will be able to get one of these backs that some like as much as the top ones later in the draft. I'm not for risking the future of the position on a sixth-rounder alone, though. (Maybe the second one would also have some return ability, so we can effectively replace Harris, too.)

Two picks devoted to what is already a crowded position would likely be a tough sale in the war room, even if the 2nd one is a Special Teams stud. But I get what your saying. The perspective your missing is I think the Cowboys have been showing more trust in their scouts in the past few years and it has in many cases paid dividends. I suspect which ever running back the Cowboys decide on, he will be a significant contributor in the upcoming season, despite the rueage conducted on this site for missing on the likes of Gurley and/or Gordon.

Whose your pet cat?

 

[gimmesix]

Two picks devoted to what is already a crowded position would likely be a tough sale in the war room, even if the 2nd one is a Special Teams stud. But I get what your saying. The perspective your missing is I think the Cowboys have been showing more trust in their scouts in the past few years and it has in many cases paid dividends. I suspect which ever running back the Cowboys decide on, he will be a significant contributor in the upcoming season, despite the rueage conducted on this site for missing on the likes of Gurley and/or Gordon.

Whose your pet cat?

I don't know if I've really got one. From a value standpoint, I like Mike Davis and David Cobb. In the footage I saw, both appeared to show the things that I look for the most, good vision and the ability to run between the tackles.

I have concerns about the rest, although Gurley's primarily deals with health. If he can stay healthy, I have few doubts that he'll be a stud. Most of the rest of the ones considered in the top two tiers (Gordon, Ajayi, Coleman, Yeldon), I feel I could build a pretty solid case for why they might fail.

That doesn't mean I believe the Cowboys shouldn't take whichever ones their scouts believe have value because it's hard to judge which ones' success against college defenses will translate to success in the NFL. I mentioned in a previous post how my "pet cats" in the 2008 draft were Ray Rice and Tashard Choice, but I also felt that Chris Johnson stood a very good chance of being a bust (didn't think he had good RB vision). I was definitely off on that one.

 

[gimmesix]

Two picks devoted to what is already a crowded position would likely be a tough sale in the war room, even if the 2nd one is a Special Teams stud. But I get what your saying.

Yes, I absolutely don't think it will happen for that reason, even though I think the later rounds are just a guessing game anyway and we might as well take whomever the scouts feel is the best player, even if that's an extra running back.