PDA

View Full Version : Scott's blog - RB Debate


BucSappy
11-27-2007, 07:16 AM
"...in 2005 Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams were both Top 5 picks and even though they are good / very good starters in the NFL were they really worth the type of draft pick and contract investments it took to bring them into the fold? I'd say absolutely not...If I am going to invest $30-$50 million dollars in a player I would rather take a chance on someone who plays a premium position like quarterback, left tackle, defensive end, or cornerback because based on the track record it will be much easier to find a good running back later on. "

While I know where Scott is coming from, but I totally disagree with what he is saying. I think it is important to take into account BPA and need and not just pass on a RB because of the position he plays. Now if you have other needs on your team and you like a player on the draft board just as much you should consider taking the other player because of the injury history RBs have (but then I make a counter argument that lots of players get injured regardless of position.

Anyways, I would really like to analyze the Dolphins and Bucs draft strategy/decisions in the 2005 NFL Draft. I bolded what Scott said up there in his blog for arguments sake.

Miami was OTC with the #2 overall pick in 2005. Another option besides Ronnie Brown was Braylon Edwards and maybe Pacman Jones (if we are evaluating player value at the time of the draft). The Dolphins certainly could have gone in either direction, but I question them taking a small CB like Pacman that high in the draft. I mean if I am picking #2 overall that CB has to be the absolute prototype. So maybe the Dolphins could have drafted Braylon Edwards and I'm pretty sure they considered it, but in hindsight I would still say they made the right decision. I mean who knows what RB would have done this year if he hadn't of gotten injured.

Tampa Bay was OTC with the fifth overall pick in 2005. Considering the Bucs don't take cornerbacks early in the draft (they can find zone corners in round 2+) we can rule out Antrel Rolle and Pacman Jones. They looked long and hard at Mike Williams, GM Bruce Allen had dinner with Williams the night before the draft so he was definately targeted. But in hindsight we know that would have been a really bad pick and the Bucs made the right decision to pass on him. But like Scott said, maybe they should have drafted Mike Williams...he would have been worth the draft pick and contract investments. :rolleyes:

Another option for the Bucs here and Jon Gruden really liked this player was Aaron Rodgers, QB, Cal. This would have been an interesting pick, but Chris Simms was waiting in the fold and how does Tampa truly ignore the need they had at RB and passed on Cadillac Williams? Again a good decision not taking Rodgers because Cadillac was a better prospect and they already had Chris Simms (and they didn't know how he was going to turn out).

#5 overall was way to high to take a player like Derrick Johnson, Jamaal Brown, or Alex Barron.

So I think can't we all agree the Dolphins and the Bucs made the right decisions on taking Ronnie Brown and Cadillac Williams? I don't think it is fair for Scott to say these team made bad picks. I'd just like to know what Scott would do here if he was these teams, because clearly to me I don't know how anyone can make the case that both these teams didn't make great decisions (only one debatable is Miami drafting Braylon Edwards).

Matthew Jones
11-27-2007, 01:43 PM
I didn't think it was way too high. I had Derrick Johnson as high as #3 overall (Cleveland) and Shawne Merriman #1 and #3 a few times in my mocks.

swordman
11-28-2007, 04:08 AM
maybe they could have traded down? (I don't remember the exact context tough)


You say "But like Scott said, maybe they should have drafted Mike Williams...he would have been worth the draft pick and contract investments."
Like they should have known how he was going to turn out

But after that you said

"they already had Chris Simms (and they didn't know how he was going to turn out). "

So that is a pretty flawed argument


I kinda agree with Scott you can find starters in lower rounds maybe not stars but starters( and much cheaper starters). It is harder for others positions so use high draft picks on others positions.


just my two cents

BucSappy
11-28-2007, 05:41 AM
maybe they could have traded down? (I don't remember the exact context tough)


You say "But like Scott said, maybe they should have drafted Mike Williams...he would have been worth the draft pick and contract investments."
Like they should have known how he was going to turn out

Well they obviously had a reason to pass on him and take Cadillac Williams. Mike Williams had his work ethic come into question during the draft process. Tampa saw it and backed off at the last moment for a player that really loves football and had more promise.

"they already had Chris Simms (and they didn't know how he was going to turn out)."

So that is a pretty flawed argument


How is that a flawed argument? They didn't have a crystal ball to find out how Simms would progress in his career, and how knows how Simms would have done if not for the spleen injury.

I kinda agree with Scott you can find starters in lower rounds maybe not stars but starters( and much cheaper starters). It is harder for others positions so use high draft picks on others positions.

Now that is a flawed argument. Because other than kicker, punter, long snapper, and guard/center you can make a great case to take any other position at any point in the draft (depends on the scenario of course).

So where does it end, meaning not to draft RBs high just because they are runningbacks? We can find capable OL in the mid rounds. Should we not draft those guys in the top 5? What about cornerback? Plenty of mid round corners are starters in the mid rounds should we not draft corners in the top 10? Argument is circular and goes on forever.

My entire point was that Scott shouldn't knock a team's draft choice when they had pretty much no where else to go/made the right decision (pertaining to Dolphins and Bucs). I don't see how those team made mistakes. Yeah. I guess he is right. Bucs should have drafted Mike Williams, Troy Williamson, Antrel Rolle, or the troubled Pacman. All 4 of those players would have been better choices than Cadillac Williams simply because they were not runningbacks? And where any of those players worth their draft pick/contract investments?