Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

I'd consider Fournette #1 if I think he's the next Peterson.

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • I'd consider Fournette #1 if I think he's the next Peterson.

    Yep, I would. An elite RB can do a lot of good for an organization.

  • #2
    Is Fournette even the next Zeke Elliot??
    (I think Zeke is going to beast in Dallas BTW.)

    It's hard to see him going 1/1 in 2017 under any scenario.
    But a smart HC and OC will understand the value a franchise RB still has in the league and IMO prioritize drafting Leonard top 5.

    Watch the Titans seriously push for a playoff berth this year with Murray and Henry in the same backfield.

    I wouldn't be surprised to see Tennessee run the ball at least 40 times a game next year and win a lot of ballgames.
    Controlling the clock, grinding out first downs on the ground, keeping your defense fresh and the opposing offense on the bench is still a winning formula in the NFL and it always will be.

    Comment


    • #3
      Could I see a team taking Fournette at 1/1?

      Not really, and that isn't because I couldn't come up with an argument for it or because he isn't an elite level prospect, its just the positional value of the RB and what also happens to be available in this draft. Though naturally Ill be curious to see how guys test at their pro-day and at the combine, there are some elite level prospects that simply have more value than an RB. For me Myles Garrett is a no brainer for consideration at #1 when you combine physical tools with actual production and positional value. Depending on scheme and needs I think a similar argument can be made for Allen. One name that I really like and think would present more value would Reuben Foster as well. Fournette eventually makes a lot of sense, but only after some of the other prime/elite athletes and prospects at other positions. I just think you can get similar production from a lesser prospect while spending a 2nd or 3rd round pick on the player - or simply dropping down.

      For instance, if I am Cleveland and I really want the RB because I want to mimic in part what Dallas is doing and I know I am no less than 1 more season away form drafting my QB, then wouldn't it make even more sense to take the best available offer for the #1 pick, drop down, obtain assets and then either take Fournette or look to Cook or Foreman (or go another direction entirely?) I am not totally sold on my option at #1 Id rather have the assets.

      Cleveland has a handful of pieces that other teams may want (Pryor, Coleman, Thomas, Bitonio, Kessler - as a backup for tools on offense, and then Haden, Collins, along with a few young guys worth continuing to develop Ogbah, Schobert, Howard, Nassib, Shelton) why not try to accumulate assets and build the talent base up with young guys who can develop and be team controlled for around 4 or 5 years?

      Comment


      • #4
        Cleveland has more talent than their record shows. A lot of young talent on defense, but they're one of a very few teams which is thinnest precisely at RB and QB. I think Fournette is an elite RB prospect, though his injury issues scare me a little bit. But if a team is comfortable with his physicals and think he's in the Zeke/AP mold, there is nothing wrong with taking him - especially when you have another mid-first round pick.

        Cleveland's offense was anemic because of lackluster QB play and an inconsistent ground game. I like Duke Johnson and Isaiah Crowell, but Johnson is a satellite back and Crowell is sort of a poor-man's Marion Barber III - he does some nice things but is best in the no. 2 role. He's certainly not someone you pass over a rare talent for.

        I see a lot of people mocking Myles Garrett to the Browns, and it's only because of perceived 'positional value.' Fournette would have a far bigger impact on the Browns than Garrett would - and that means he'd be a better pick for them at no. 1.

        This is also, I think, shaping up to be an interesting draft for QBs. There isn't an Andrew Luck in there who looks like a plug-and-play first year starter, but there is a handful of prospects who warrant consideration in the mid-first - where Cleveland will be picking again.

        They've got some draft capital, and they've got some players who other teams want if they need to move around a little bit in the draft, and I think it's more than possible that any one of Mitch Trubisky, DeShone Kizer, DeShawn Watson, or Patrick Mahomes will be available to them at #14 or so, and any one of them could be a viable pick there. They'll most likely have a choice between more than one of those.

        There isn't a blue chip QB in this class, but there are two blue chip running backs in Fournette and Dalvin Cook. I think you go for the blue chip players when you have a chance, especially if they are an obvious upgrade to your team, and work back from there. If they go QB first, they're reaching and then losing out on an elite talent which their offense desperately needs. If they take a running back with their first pick, they've added an explosive-yet-safe (in the sense that running back is one of the easiest positions to project) player and will still have a chance to add another high-level talent to their QB room just a dozen or so picks later.
        Last edited by Caulibflower; 01-01-2017, 05:48 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Caulibflower View Post
          Cleveland has more talent than their record shows. A lot of young talent on defense, but they're one of a very few teams which is thinnest precisely at RB and QB. I think Fournette is an elite RB prospect, though his injury issues scare me a little bit. But if a team is comfortable with his physicals and think he's in the Zeke/AP mold, there is nothing wrong with taking him - especially when you have another mid-first round pick.

          Cleveland's offense was anemic because of lackluster QB play and an inconsistent ground game. I like Duke Johnson and Isaiah Crowell, but Johnson is a satellite back and Crowell is sort of a poor-man's Marion Barber III - he does some nice things but is best in the no. 2 role. He's certainly not someone you pass over a rare talent for.

          I see a lot of people mocking Myles Garrett to the Browns, and it's only because of perceived 'positional value.' Fournette would have a far bigger impact on the Browns than Garrett would - and that means he'd be a better pick for them at no. 1.

          This is also, I think, shaping up to be an interesting draft for QBs. There isn't an Andrew Luck in there who looks like a plug-and-play first year starter, but there is a handful of prospects who warrant consideration in the mid-first - where Cleveland will be picking again.

          They've got some draft capital, and they've got some players who other teams want if they need to move around a little bit in the draft, and I think it's more than possible that any one of Mitch Trubisky, DeShone Kizer, DeShawn Watson, or Patrick Mahomes will be available to them at #14 or so, and any one of them could be a viable pick there. They'll most likely have a choice between more than one of those.

          There isn't a blue chip QB in this class, but there are two blue chip running backs in Fournette and Dalvin Cook. I think you go for the blue chip players when you have a chance, especially if they are an obvious upgrade to your team, and work back from there. If they go QB first, they're reaching and then losing out on an elite talent which their offense desperately needs. If they take a running back with their first pick, they've added an explosive-yet-safe (in the sense that running back is one of the easiest positions to project) player and will still have a chance to add another high-level talent to their QB room just a dozen or so picks later.

          I agree with your assessment. I think the Browns are in the position where drafting an elite level RB could make sense - and frankly I am starting to think the best way to draft is to avoid QBs all-together unless you are absolutely sold on the prospect and have a nucleus around the player. QBs, LTs and Pass Rush specialists command the most amount of money on the open market and are usually the most difficult to find which is why they routinely go high in the draft and teams routinely find busts - teams bye-pass more talented players to strike to hit it rich with a high ceiling prospect at a key position. The examples are countless. Though I will also concede that there are "busts" at nearly every position and my own draft strategy still involves seeking trades down to stockpile assets and picks I am now more convinced than ever that unless you have some sort of generational talent staring you in the face you should pick the best player available and worry about getting the QB later.

          Look at how many of the top teams are this year - they are teams that rely on QBs who were drafted far later and rely on other options - this works for a multitude of ways. If I can build up my trenches, find legitimate NFL caliber RB, WRs and TE then the QBs transition is lightyears easier and I should know what I have far faster - if I draft a guy I like late and it turns out I was wrong then I can cut bait a lot easier with a 4th or 5th round pick then I can with a top 10 pick.

          Look at the NFL playoffs this year - of the teams who made it, the Lions and Giants are wild-card teams and the Lions have largely been a dumpster fire for most of Stafford's career. The other first round QBs in the playoffs are Matt Ryan, Alex Smith (who came to KC after a trade for a later than 1st round pick) Dolphins and Steelers. I think most would agree the Dolphins made it due to a horrific schedule and in many ways despite what Tannehill was bringing to the table. Big Ben is a stud, but he was welcomed into a great situation and certainly is surrounded by talent. All other teams are running to the playoffs with guys drafted OUTSIDE of the first round and have been able to expend resources at other positions and bring their QB into a better situation.

          So my theory is two fold: bring your new franchise QB into a situation where he can actually succeed, that means going a year or two drafting BPA, spending money to acquire "weapons" and then spend a later round pick on the guy you like. The second portion of this theory involves the cap number and money the player sets the team back - its a large part of why the Seahawks had continued success - having the QB playing far above market value allows money to be spent at other spots. If you KNOW you have your guy and he is 4 or 5 years into the league you eventually have to pay him, but hopefully he has developed into a player who can rise other guys games up.

          Comment


          • #6
            To continue my point and to follow-up on your point regarding Fournette - I agree. The Browns are clearly not just a player or two away from competing, I also believe strongly that there are no QBs worth taking in the top 10 this year (and likely not really in the top 20), so if you know this is a long-term rebuild and you actually want to see your QB succeed, try drafting BPA, fill some holes and wait until next year where the QB market appears far deeper.

            For this year, I think the most bang for your buck is with Garret at #1 and then taking Cook at #12 (if available) otherwise draft the BPA again.I do think the Browns have something with Coleman and Pryor at WR, and they have a few decent pieces along the o-line, but they do need a true workhorse RB to lighten the load and create favorable match-ups for their QB.

            If the Browns took my advice, a trade out of #1 would make a ton of sense. They drop a few spots, secure more draft capital for this year and next, draft either Fournette or Cook, utilize #12 on the BPA and head into next year having filled a number of holes. Then next year, with a still likely top 10 pick, they could make a play for a QB in a draft where I think there may be a few legitimate options. Whomever they draft could come into a far more favorable situation where they may actually succeed.

            Comment


            • #7
              I don't believe Fournette is the best RB in the draft.

              Comment


              • #8
                I've fallen off the Fournette bandwagon to some degree. I'm not sure he's even worth a top 5 or 10 pick right now. The Browns need to find an effing QB, or at least a position player who is extremely safe and at a needed position.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think Fournette warrants consideration. I probably wouldn't be able to do it in the end, as I believe Trubisky will grade out as top 5 worthy when fully evaluated and Garrett and Allen are as good or better than Fournette as prospects at more valuable positions. Maybe Williams and Hooker too.

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X

                  Debug Information