Dane Bruglar's Top 100-RB's

[Cowboyny]

top 100 RBs in the upcoming draft? so what, 3 RB's per a team and still more to go? not sure im understanding this right.

Great depth at the position

 

[DFWJC]

I'm curious to see how Keaton Mitchell does
Talk about explosive and elusive....but he's small

He has Archane as his 3rd best back (at 61) but I don't see a real difference between him and Mitchell....size or speed or skill

 

[gimmesix]

I’m not going to argue with you and I don’t need a history lesson. Like I said, this year is loaded and if it were me, I would trade down for someone who can’t live without him. Even though no one picked him in the first 25 picks, I’m sure every other team would be drooling for him.

Edit: And I said 3rd & 4th (depends on who is still around) not sure why you are stuck on 4th round. I told you the backs that I thought would be there. You can make your own judgement on their value.

Because statistically taking a back in the fourth round on has a very low percentage of success and it's important to recognize that. History can teach us a lot, like even in a loaded draft, the longer you wait, the higher your chances of failing. (Maybe you don't need that reminder, but reading through a lot of these draft threads, it seems like some do.)

For what it's worth, while I have no problem with taking Robinson or Gibbs in the first round, my mock doesn't have us taking a back until the third round because I chose to take Kancey in the first and Tippmann in the second and wait to take a back because of the depth at that position in this draft. It's a calculated risk, but in RB-loaded drafts, it seems like the first three rounds hold up fairly well as far as producing talent.

As far as judging value, that doesn't really factor in the equation for me. There have been players I thought were going to be huge successes who weren't, players I thought were going to be failures who weren't and players I thought were going to be great who were. This is all about understanding draft success rates.

 

[Spottswoode]

top 100 RBs in the upcoming draft? so what, 3 RB's per a team and still more to go? not sure im understanding this right.

It’s just shows where this site ranks RB’s on their top 100 big board (7 total…2-R1, 2-R2, ~3-R3).

 

[cnuball21]

If we drafted Robinson, he would be just a piece of the puzzle. Every piece matters, and you want to have the best you can at all positions. I don't consider running back to be any less important. The position just doesn't have the long-term durability of other positions, so it generally isn't worth investing a second contract.

Some would rather we draft a receiver this year with the first-round pick even though we've got one we just paid, another we're looking to pay and just traded for one. I can't understand the value of that over a player we need more because our starter is coming off a major injury and our backup is a bargain castoff.

Bc RBs have short shelf life’s, seem to get injured more and their success depends on OL play. That’s why the value is low.

I just painted the picture of WR vs RB costs. Cooks is on a short deal and we’re likely to get out of Gallups contract as quickly as possible.

 

[gimmesix]

Bc RBs have short shelf life’s, seem to get injured more and their success depends on OL play. That’s why the value is low.

I just painted the picture of WR vs RB costs. Cooks is on a short deal and we’re likely to get out of Gallups contract as quickly as possible.

 

[gimmesix]

Bc RBs have short shelf life’s, seem to get injured more and their success depends on OL play. That’s why the value is low.

I just painted the picture of WR vs RB costs. Cooks is on a short deal and we’re likely to get out of Gallups contract as quickly as possible.

Gallup costs about as much to cut as to keep in 2024. Cooks' contract next year is a very reasonable hit. We have no reason to let either go unless they play poorly. Top three receivers are set through 2024.

Meanwhile, our top running back is injured on a franchise, one-year tag. We picked up a bargain washout to be our No. 2 running back. The need for this year and even next year is much greater at running back.

Last year, we did a very poor job of addressing receiver. We cut a starter, and part-time third receiver, and tried to replace them with a bargain FA and a third-round pick. Some of you would have us do that same this year at RB. Because of the low value of the RB position, we might can get away with waiting until the third to address it, but it's important to acknowledge the risk associated with that. I see no reason this year to take a receiver in the first three rounds over a running back. It just does not make sense unless the receiver is a higher value player who dropped for some reason.

 

[cnuball21]

Gallup costs about as much to cut as to keep in 2024. Cooks' contract next year is a very reasonable hit. We have no reason to let either go unless they play poorly. Top three receivers are set through 2024.

Meanwhile, our top running back is injured on a franchise, one-year tag. We picked up a bargain washout to be our No. 2 running back. The need for this year and even next year is much greater at running back.

Last year, we did a very poor job of addressing receiver. We cut a starter, and part-time third receiver, and tried to replace them with a bargain FA and a third-round pick. Some of you would have us do that same this year at RB. Because of the low value of the RB position, we might can get away with waiting until the third to address it, but it's important to acknowledge the risk associated with that. I see no reason this year to take a receiver in the first three rounds over a running back. It just does not make sense unless the receiver is a higher value player who dropped for some reason.

For MG we’d likely have to eat some of his contract if we move him…and he’s not that good. Cooks is again short term. You aren’t drafting in the 1st round for 2023 alone…it’s 5 years.

TP was one of the best RBs in football last year…in giving him the tag Is like to think we did our due diligence on his medicals and he’ll come back 100%. Do agree we should’ve gotten a bettter cheap vet in FA but it’s a loaded class and I’m not worried.

 

[gimmesix]

For MG we’d likely have to eat some of his contract if we move him…and he’s not that good. Cooks is again short term. You aren’t drafting in the 1st round for 2023 alone…it’s 5 years.

TP was one of the best RBs in football last year…in giving him the tag Is like to think we did our due diligence on his medicals and he’ll come back 100%. Do agree we should’ve gotten a bettter cheap vet in FA but it’s a loaded class and I’m not worried.

Well, we also expected Gallup to come back and be the No. 2 receiver and we saw how that worked out. A running back coming off a major leg injury should always be a concern.

I guess with receiver, I don't see why we need to start his five years this year when we've got our top three under contract. It seems like overkill. If Gallup doesn't regain his form this year, then we move on from him next year and make receiver a priority.

We have several positions that are a lot worse off than receiver after the Cooks trade. Same with corner after the trade for Gilmore. We addressed those spots, so unless a unicorn falls, let's address those others.

 

[Spottswoode]

Because statistically taking a back in the fourth round on has a very low percentage of success and it's important to recognize that. History can teach us a lot, like even in a loaded draft, the longer you wait, the higher your chances of failing. (Maybe you don't need that reminder, but reading through a lot of these draft threads, it seems like some do.)

For what it's worth, while I have no problem with taking Robinson or Gibbs in the first round, my mock doesn't have us taking a back until the third round because I chose to take Kancey in the first and Tippmann in the second and wait to take a back because of the depth at that position in this draft. It's a calculated risk, but in RB-loaded drafts, it seems like the first three rounds hold up fairly well as far as producing talent.

As far as judging value, that doesn't really factor in the equation for me. There have been players I thought were going to be huge successes who weren't, players I thought were going to be failures who weren't and players I thought were going to be great who were. This is all about understanding draft success rates.

Then talk to them instead of giving me a dissertation, especially when there are convenient omissions to try to make your point. I’m just here because I enjoy draft talk and will likely be gone when it’s over. I have no interest in arguing and I don’t share the same degree of rabidness that many here exhibit.

To be clear, you seem to want to focus on R4 when I said R3 & 4. Re-read my post. In my opinion there will be loads of RB talent in R3 & 4. It’s up to the Cowboys to do their due diligence…I’m just an arm chair GM. Considering they have met with a number of backs projected in those rounds, I would think they at least somewhat share that opinion and are doing that due diligence. If you feel like history shows that predicting the success of RB’s drafted in R3 & 4 in a ridiculously deep class will be a crap shoot, especially during a time where RB’s are undervalued relative to the past and tend get drafted later, that’s fine...we can move on. I’m not trying to change your opinion…I’m just sharing mine. If the Cowboys want to draft a RB in R1, that’s great and I will cheer for him. I wouldn’t do it but if it’s Bijan, he should be an excellent back. Cheers

 

[cnuball21]

Well, we also expected Gallup to come back and be the No. 2 receiver and we saw how that worked out. A running back coming off a major leg injury should always be a concern.

I guess with receiver, I don't see why we need to start his five years this year when we've got our top three under contract. It seems like overkill. If Gallup doesn't regain his form this year, then we move on from him next year and make receiver a priority.

We have several positions that are a lot worse off than receiver after the Cooks trade. Same with corner after the trade for Gilmore. We addressed those spots, so unless a unicorn falls, let's address those others.

Bc most rookies take time to develop. It’s the exact same reason we’re looking at a lot of DEs and CBs now.

Ideally you don’t want to count on rookies to be high end starters.

 

[Spottswoode]

As far as judging value, that doesn't really factor in the equation for me. There have been players I thought were going to be huge successes who weren't, players I thought were going to be failures who weren't and players I thought were going to be great who were. This is all about understanding draft success rates.

One more point of clarity since this comment was confusing and I had to go back to see what you were referring to. Teams are always making value decisions during the draft. If you choose to use the 26th pick on a player as opposed to trading down and for an extra 3rd, that is a choice that likely included a value consideration. BPA is a little more nuanced than simply looking at a board. My ideal scenario would be to drop down, get an extra 3rd, and take someone like Benton and a guard in the second, grab my RB in the third because of depth, and use my newly obtained 3rd for someone like Darius Rush (or a TE, or edge). I want to at least try to grab another really good player of need cheaper than normal due to position depth. In this case, I value adding someone like Spears or Evans plus Rush more than I value Bijan alone. I shared who I thought would be available so you could judge the value of selecting Bijan v. who you might get in the third and using 26 elsewhere. IMO, if you use 26 on someone other than guard, it makes 58 an easy choice as I don’t see a guard at 90 who will contribute much this year.

 

[iceberg]

It’s just shows where this site ranks RB’s on their top 100 big board (7 total…2-R1, 2-R2, ~3-R3).

Thank you

 

[gimmesix]

One more point of clarity since this comment was confusing and I had to go back to see what you were referring to. Teams are always making value decisions during the draft. If you choose to use the 26th pick on a player as opposed to trading down and for an extra 3rd, that is a choice that likely included a value consideration. BPA is a little more nuanced than simply looking at a board. My ideal scenario would be to drop down, get an extra 3rd, and take someone like Benton and a guard in the second, grab my RB in the third because of depth, and use my newly obtained 3rd for someone like Darius Rush (or a TE, or edge). I want to at least try to grab another really good player of need cheaper than normal due to position depth. In this case, I value adding someone like Spears or Evans plus Rush more than I value Bijan alone. I shared who I thought would be available so you could judge the value of selecting Bijan v. who you might get in the third and using 26 elsewhere. IMO, if you use 26 on someone other than guard, it makes 58 an easy choice as I don’t see a guard at 90 who will contribute much this year.

I just meant that I don't decide on player values. I don't study the draft enough to tell anyone who is going to be a great player, and even those who do are constantly wrong. I do look at rankings, read about strengths and weaknesses, watch highlight films, but all those do is give me an idea about who I might like. That's one reason I don't sweat it too much when the team selects someone that wasn't among my favorites. They spend a whole lot more time on this than I do.

Last year, I felt the Tyler Smith decision was questionable and that we went more with need than value. I had interest in Christian Watson because of what we had done (had not done) at receiver. However, I did think Jalen Tolbert was a good consolation prize in the third, although after our first-round pick, I was hoping Alec Pierce would fall to us in the second.

I agree that teams certainly have to make value considerations.

 

[T-RO]

Give Pollard an extra 31.
Jones 125.
3rd RB 75.

Jones had 192 carries in 2020.

That's the backup plan. Not what Cowboys front office is hoping for. They'll be in the RB market pretty hard, at some point, if picks fall as desired.