(05-05-2023, 03:49 PM)Cleatwood Wrote:

(05-05-2023, 02:37 PM)Jaguarmeister Wrote: I'm not sure how you can value the RB position relative to other positions if you're unwilling to allocate more meaningful resources toward it.  That sounds more like the definition of de-valuing the position, which is fine. It is by all accounts much more likely that a given RB's career is going to be more short lived than that of other positions.  Your qualifiers make it sound more like just paying lip service to the idea of valuing the position though.

I like having good RBs. Good RBs are great!

However, you can find them allllll over. Pacheco was in the 7th round last year and the Chiefs 1st rounder road the pine. In fact, Pacheco and FA off the street McKinnon vastly out played the first round pick of CEH.

Great to have good RBs but build a good system and you can find them just about anywhere.

The problem is that you are trying to portray the exception as the rule.  Yes, Pacheco had 830 yards last year.  However, the 10 running backs taken immediately in front of him in the same draft combined for 421 yards. There were 18 running backs picked on Day 3 last year.  Only 3 of them had more than 150 rushing yards.  That's less than 20%.  If you take out the 4th round, it drops to 8.3%.  If you take out the exception of Pacheco, it drops to 0%.

---