Looking Forward to the 2019 AFC North

May be time to embrace Duke. Hunt is linked to some kind of fight at a club...... So far it's a "nothing burger" but.....

Duke has been very good for us and ranks among the best backs in many metrics, so it's always bothered me that he was underutilized. I hope Baker learns that how to separate the contract issues from the "team" issues, and that he and Duke are on good terms, cause we're going to need him, whether Hunt survives his suspension or not.

As for Hunt. Do yourself a favor and find ways to entertain yourself that don't include being out til the wee hours in situations you cannot control.

 

Kareem Hunt, Duke Johnson, Dontrell Hilliard, or Trayone Gray... they're all just fighting for Nick Chubb's 10% crumbs anyway. Chubb was PFF.com's top running back in the NFL last season as a rookie and didn't see more than 20 carries until Week 9 of the season.

Saw a post the other day (and will try to link to it if I can find it again) talking about the difference a top-tier running back makes (versus the value of replacement) and it was less than one (1!) win per season. It's a position that's truly been devalued to almost nothing and the smartest clubs will be those that continually look to the draft to get a young, cheap player for a few seasons and then repeat (see also, New England Patriots).

Enjoy Chubb while we have him and root for a monster season. He'll see 85-90% of the workload and whomever his backup is, we can rest easy knowing they won't cost us more than a single win over the course of 16 games.

 

I think Hunt would become a favorite because of his pass catching ability.

 

I believe you are correct in your overall assessment of the RB position's value to any team. I'm not sure we agree on the individuals, how they rank, etcetera.

Chubb had a great year, but I honestly question his ranking based on some remarkable break away runs early in the year, padding his stats, but the man can carry the rock. By your "any RB will do" philosophy, he becomes "the man to keep", by virtue of his price tag/contract position.
Hunt has to be suspect due to his suspension / vulnerability to being gone should another incident come to light. Duke is paid above his contribution level, and Hilliard is a virtual nobody in the league. This puts talent aside, just looking at RBs as cogs in the wheel.

Beyond that the talent eval leaves Hilliard behind, as he hasn't "proven" his value in real games. Duke has shown that, as has Hunt, and of course Chubb. Still there has to be a ranking of them going forward, and maybe that is where Hilliard gains ground. He's definitely the least likely to attract team's looking for a RB, so you can argue, he's least likely to be traded, where as Hunt and Duke are both "known" commodities, thus trade bait.

All of them offer multiple years of solid, if not great play, as they are all young. It's an embarassment of wealth for a franchise that hasn't been able to boast that for years, and we simultaneously have the same situation at the Reciever position. Even after letting Perriman go, we have no depth issues. Wow!

This should be a fun year. We'll have to thin the ranks as the season goes on, or make some hard decisions once the year ends, but we've got plenty of chips, a GM who is a willing player, and a QB who can make them all better. Are we set up of what?

 

I've been thinking about the "1 game" difference statement..... It sounds so innocuous, and it is in Baseball it's less than 1%, in basketball it's barely more than 1%.

If your team was to lose 10 games in Baseball or 6 games in basketball, would that make a difference? Those are approximately the equivalent to losing 1 NFL game.

It's why we hang on every play, every snap, every game. Each one is sooo important. Given the value of "one game" it now makes me wonder how many other "position players" in the NFL have that much impact. What about the left tackle, the center, the middle linebacker, defensive end, kicker, etc.....

Ultimately it's a question answered by each team's depth or "fall off" due to injuries, or coaching effectiveness, or team orientation, or on field leadership. Too many variables to make the "1 game" evaluation very meaningful IMO.

That said, I think our position of strength at both RB and WR are enviable, and I don't see the loss on any single player having that much impact. Thank you John Dorsey.

I guess my point is: losing your RB is not the same in Dallas, as it is in Washington, because the drop off isn't equivalent in talent or in how much of the team's identity is built around that position. In our case, we have strength that runs pretty deep, so our "fall off" should be minimal, and our QB seems perfectly capable of making "all" of the pieces work as a whole.

 

Under the heading of "I remember when": the single game idea made me think back to when NFL meant Sunday, and Sunday only.

Growing up NFL games were Sunday. It was NFL day. IMO it is one of the reasons why the NFL became so popular. It allowed most people to see the games, and it gave us a week to talk about and fret about what went right and what didn't.

When Monday Night Football came into being it was fantastic too. It made you wait one day, but you got to see the same game as the rest of the nation, and for many of us was the only opportunity to see the week's "highlights". Back then you got to see only the "local" team, with the intermittent "double header" of a 1 o'clock / 4 o'clock game, where you might see a "marquee game" with nationally significant teams.

Much has changed. The 24 news cycle, ESPN, the internet, all have made football a bigger business, and access to any game a reasonable option for most people. I am all good with those developments, but I have to say that the "Thursday Night Football" games have diminished the focus for me. It has diminished the specialness that NFL Sunday once was. It has given us games with "lesser teams", asking them to turn their weekly recovery and game prep routines inside out, and thus making the games of a lower quality of play.

I'm clearly an old timer, so this may just be the complaint of a dinosaur, waiting for the meteor to finish me off. It's a pain in the butt, to have to interrupt my week, to check the waiver wires and injury reports nearly every day of the week to keep my fantasy team relevant.

So, other than that Mrs Lincoln, how'd you like the play......

 

Left Tackle

We have, for better or worse, the ultimate case study in that with the best left tackle to ever play the game (#nothyperbole). Joe Thomas played 167 games for the Cleveland Browns and they went 48-119 with him never missing a snap (0.287). Over 20% of those wins came in his rookie season.

Bottom line is that beginning around 2006 - 2007, it shifted from a running back dominant league to a quarterback dominant league and that position is probably 75-85% of the success of a franchise (maybe higher, honestly... if we have 12 post-season teams a year, find three - 25% - without a "franchise" QB). A decade ago (2008), the average passing yards for a team was 3,380 and 20 touchdowns in a season. The average rushing yards were 1,855 and 15 touchdowns in a season.

In 2018, the average passing yards for a team was 3,804 and 27 touchdowns in a season. The average rushing yards were 1,831 and 14 touchdowns in a season.

Avg. pass yards were up 12.5% with avg. pass touchdowns up 35.0%. While avg. rush yards are down 1.3% and touchdowns are down 6.7%.

 

2018 Playoff Teams

Kansas City
New England
Houston
Los Angeles (AFC)
Indianapolis
Baltimore - nope

New Orleans
Los Angeles (NFC)
Chicago - maybe
Dallas - maybe
Seattle
Philadelphia - maybe

Eight definitely, three maybe, and one nope (or at least, not yet).

 

To be fair, he only had two runs of 50+ yards all season, and only one early (Oakland). You could play that game with just about any running back.

Saquon Barkley (aka, the "Anointed One") had six runs of 50+ yards... if we pulled those out of his totals his overall numbers dip to 255 rushes, 940 yards (3.7 YPC), 7 touchdowns versus his 261, 1,307 yards (5.0 YPC), and 11 touchdowns. They would still have given him the ROY award just to enrage Baker and the Browns fanbase.

Saquon's big runs were 1.9% of his touches, 28.1% of his yards, and 36.3% of his touchdowns.
Chubb's big runs were 1.0% of his touches, 15.6% of his yards, and 25.0% of his touchdowns.

Chubb was flat-out better than Saquon last season - and in my opinion *all* running backs.

Regarding the "man to keep", though... we'll have to see what happens with the CBA, his production, and the Browns. Again, as great as Chubb was/is, I think the days of shelling out huge bucks for a running back may be in the past (unless you're the New York Jets).

 

RBs are going crazy about getting more money. Gordon threatening to pull a Bell and sit out the season. Chubb will want to break the bank If he continues on his current pace

 

Gotta believe Dorsey can see that coming and may be part of why he got Hunt. Still I agree with SAS, long term investments at RB are questionable. As shitty as I felt Lev Bell was treated by Pitt, I get it.

The question is "what is the value of 'one game", if we actually agree that defines the difference a RB can make.

With the game moving rapidly to passing at 70% of plays, it's the passing game that opens up the run, rather than the other way around, and the short passing taking even more runs out of the game plan, how much of a difference can a RB make.

Certainly a back who's skilled in receiving is a must, and Chubb has shown some skill there, but so too has Hunt and Duke. It's a tough call, and thankfully one that needn't be made now. The reality is RBs will get hurt, and if it's Chubb, we'll be happy Duke is with us, and if it's some other team's RB, we'll accept a better offer, whether it's for Duke or Hunt.

 

Going crazy because they see the trend.

The average percentage of cap spent on the position (for all running backs on a team) is 4.3, with the highest on a single team being 7.31%. The top three guys (Gurley, Bell, Johnson) all average over $10 million a season, but everyone else is below that mark, with an average of $5.2 million across the Top 32 contracts.

Wide receivers make up 11.67% of a teams' total contract and there's 22 guys averaging $10 million (or more) a season.
Offensive line... 18.5%.
Defensive line... 15.6%.
Linebackers... 10.6% (OLB - 5.7%, ILB - 3.8%)
EDGE... 14.6%
Cornerbacks... 10.5%

Add to the contract complexity that the position historically, (1) doesn't have a long shelf-life, (2) is one of the lowest "learning curves" for NCAA-to-NFL conversion, and (3) has moved to a "committee" model for many (most?) teams.

 

The two most expensive guys - Todd Gurley and Le'veon Bell - were replaced by their teams last season and the offenses didn't miss a beat.

 

That’s why they devalue the position. Every RB that gets paid is almost assuredly will start missing games.

 

If I'm the Rams I do everything I can to keep Gurley healthy in 2019 so I can release him in March 2020.

 

If I'm the NFLPA, I'm looking to limit rookie RB contracts to 2 years, to allow them their one time oppty to get a real contract. Whats the avg tenure of an RB in the NFL anyway... a handful of years?

Lot of risk for comparatively little reward.

 

That would KILL the RB market in the draft. No one will spend a pick in the top 4 rounds on a player they will only have for two years guaranteed.

RBs typically have a 8-10 year shelf life, so they get one big contract, then it depends on wear, tear and health for that second deal. That's also why you see more RB leaving early for the draft, I would put the average age of a rookie RB at 20.. as soon as they are eligible, they are gone, even if they have a 4th or 5th round grade.

 

fair point Irish, but avg of 8 - 10 yrs????

 

Got my curiousity too so I went and did some digging.

(source: NFLPA)

• 1st round draft picks .................................................. 9.3 years
• Rookies who make 53 man opening day roster ....... 6.0 years
• Average career (all positions) ................................... 3.3 years
• Running Backs ............................................................ 2.6 years