Georgia OLB Azeez Ojulari - Reddick replacement in Rd 1

[Chopper0080]

The question those who want a RB should be asking is, where do Javonte Williams, Michael Carter, Trey Sermon, Travis Etienne, and Kenneth Gainwell fall in comparisons to each other? Also, what grade do they all have?

If I were to rank a top 5
1-Najee Harris
2-Javonte Williams
3-Travis Etienne
4-Kenneth Gainwell
5-Trey Sermon

Truth be told, I am a bit split on Etienne vs Gainwell. Also, I don't really care about short yardage. I would rather have a back who fits the majority of our offense. Role players can be found in rounds 7 or as an UDFA.

 

[abcard]

Just from watching highlights of Michael Carter it seems he has great field vision. I hate seeing running backs run into their blockers and then try to make their move around them. Carter seems to see what’s ahead and makes his move before he runs into the pile. If I remember correctly while watching the Senior Bowl practices the announcers said Carter increased his value by being there. Besides his running ability I believe they really liked his pass catching ability too. If we could pick up a 3rd round pick I think he would be good in our offense. He’s not a thumper or blazer though.

 

[Solar7]

Cleveland - Nick Chubb - 4th RB taken
Pittsburgh - James Conner - 8th RB taken
Indianapolis - Jonathan Taylor - 3rd RB taken
Buffalo - Devin Singletary - 5th RB taken
Baltimore - JK Dobbins - 5th RB taken
Tennessee - Derrick Henry - 2nd RB taken
Kansas City - CEH - 1st RB taken

LA Rams - Cam Akers - 4th Rb taken
Seattle - Chris Carson - Lots taken before him
Chicago - David Montgomery - 4th RB taken
New Orleans - Alvin Kamara - 5th RB taken
Tampa Bay - Ronald Jones - 5th RB taken
Washington - Antonio Gibson - 7th RB taken
Green Bay - Aaron Jones - 19th RB taken

Again...your not looking at the results. Only three of the RBs those teams drafted were in the top 3 RB s drafted in any given year.

Once again, the argument is to sit at our spot in round 2 and let the draft come to us if we are waiting for a RB. The argument is that RBs have shown to be able to contribute right away for teams with solid offensive lines. That the 4th or 5th RB in draft classes are still able to provide solid production. That our roster will have a role for that player immediately and also give our offense another needed weapon.

My argument about the top 3 has nothing to do with the amount of guys taken before them, but where I feel there's a cliff in talent/fit. I can come up with arguments for why Harris, Etienne, and Williams are all very sound picks for us, but a Michael Carter, who is generally the next guy up, might not bring enough in variance from Edmonds to be the right pick.

I have mid-round guys I like, but we don't pick there.

 

[Chopper0080]

My argument about the top 3 has nothing to do with the amount of guys taken before them, but where I feel there's a cliff in talent/fit. I can come up with arguments for why Harris, Etienne, and Williams are all very sound picks for us, but a Michael Carter, who is generally the next guy up, might not bring enough in variance from Edmonds to be the right pick.

I have mid-round guys I like, but we don't pick there.

I feel like you are changing your argument in this thread and sometimes within the same posts. Here are your contradictory posts within this one thread.

###

Okay, we'll see how many wins we get when the running game is weak and pathetic and the offense sputters as Kyler is having an off day or is a little hurt.

Talent at the RB position actually matters.

Day 2, fine, reasonable, but it gives us one pick as an option, where the top RBs will probably be off the board by the time we pick. Scary position to be in.

I really can't fathom this sudden mindset that any ol' player is gonna come in here and tear it up.

If we had a 3rd rounder, it wouldn't be as panicky, but the position is just paper thin. Even scarier if you don't think all that highly of Edmonds.

It's not so much that I desperately want us to pick an RB in the first, it's that in terms of what draft capital we have, we don't have many opportunities to upgrade the position. If you go back to early March and February, when we had a pick in the top 3 rounds, I wasn't pushing to get one that high.

But the way the board is playing out without our 3rd rounder, it looks like the 1st round is going to be our only chance of moving the needle and getting a talented without a ton of luck. The top three backs will likely be gone by #49, and reaching for a Michael Carter or similar in the 2nd isn't a great move.

I'm not asking for a star, I'm asking for adequate production. And I'm asking to hedge our bets a little bit, since Edmonds has already missed 5 career games due to hamstring injuries, which he also had at Fordham.

The only reason I'm arguing for an RB in the first is because we won't have a shot at the top 3 RBs in the second and don't have a third. I'm all for trading back to acquire a 3rd and drafting an RB there. It's simply a matter of the spot we're in, not philosophical support of needing a 1st round RB all the time.

###

You bounce back between you are afraid to lose out on one of the top three because our offense needs a difference maker at RB to you wouldn't be worried about a RB if we had a 3rd round pick because we just need adequate production from our RBs. Which is it?

EDIT: I just don't understand how you are against RB in round 2 when you are ok with a RB in round 1 OR in round 3 (if we had a pick there).

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

Cleveland - Nick Chubb - 4th RB taken
Pittsburgh - James Conner - 8th RB taken
Indianapolis - Jonathan Taylor - 3rd RB taken
Buffalo - Devin Singletary - 5th RB taken
Baltimore - JK Dobbins - 5th RB taken
Tennessee - Derrick Henry - 2nd RB taken
Kansas City - CEH - 1st RB taken

LA Rams - Cam Akers - 4th Rb taken
Seattle - Chris Carson - Lots taken before him
Chicago - David Montgomery - 4th RB taken
New Orleans - Alvin Kamara - 5th RB taken
Tampa Bay - Ronald Jones - 5th RB taken
Washington - Antonio Gibson - 7th RB taken
Green Bay - Aaron Jones - 19th RB taken

Again...your not looking at the results. Only three of the RBs those teams drafted were in the top 3 RB s drafted in any given year.

Once again, the argument is to sit at our spot in round 2 and let the draft come to us if we are waiting for a RB. The argument is that RBs have shown to be able to contribute right away for teams with solid offensive lines. That the 4th or 5th RB in draft classes are still able to provide solid production. That our roster will have a role for that player immediately and also give our offense another needed weapon.

That’s a much more compelling data set. If we aren’t convinced of a corner available at 16 and none of the wrs/Pitts drops I hope we go oline. Fill in one of the two question marks (hopefully jones competes for the other). Then whatever rb we trot out there has a much better fighting chance.

 

[Solar7]

I feel like you are changing your argument in this thread and sometimes within the same posts. Here are your contradictory posts within this one thread.

###

Okay, we'll see how many wins we get when the running game is weak and pathetic and the offense sputters as Kyler is having an off day or is a little hurt.

Talent at the RB position actually matters.

Day 2, fine, reasonable, but it gives us one pick as an option, where the top RBs will probably be off the board by the time we pick. Scary position to be in.

I really can't fathom this sudden mindset that any ol' player is gonna come in here and tear it up.

If we had a 3rd rounder, it wouldn't be as panicky, but the position is just paper thin. Even scarier if you don't think all that highly of Edmonds.

It's not so much that I desperately want us to pick an RB in the first, it's that in terms of what draft capital we have, we don't have many opportunities to upgrade the position. If you go back to early March and February, when we had a pick in the top 3 rounds, I wasn't pushing to get one that high.

But the way the board is playing out without our 3rd rounder, it looks like the 1st round is going to be our only chance of moving the needle and getting a talented without a ton of luck. The top three backs will likely be gone by #49, and reaching for a Michael Carter or similar in the 2nd isn't a great move.

I'm not asking for a star, I'm asking for adequate production. And I'm asking to hedge our bets a little bit, since Edmonds has already missed 5 career games due to hamstring injuries, which he also had at Fordham.

The only reason I'm arguing for an RB in the first is because we won't have a shot at the top 3 RBs in the second and don't have a third. I'm all for trading back to acquire a 3rd and drafting an RB there. It's simply a matter of the spot we're in, not philosophical support of needing a 1st round RB all the time.

###

You bounce back between you are afraid to lose out on one of the top three because our offense needs a difference maker at RB to you wouldn't be worried about a RB if we had a 3rd round pick because we just need adequate production from our RBs. Which is it?

How are any of those contradictory? Here are the statements I am making:

- We need an upgrade or alternative to Edmonds at RB.
- I do not envision an upgrade to Edmonds coming from the 5th round or beyond.
- There are three backs worthy of a 1st/2nd round pick. They would represent upgrades at the position.
- These three backs will likely not be available when we pick in the 2nd.
- If they are gone, the remaining backs are probably not worth reaching for compared to other talent on the board and would not be the selection.
- This would leave us without acquiring a potential adequate back for the 2021 season, barring a trade, in my opinion.

If you believe one of the top 3 will fall to the second round, or that the other RBs ranked behind the top 3 are viable targets with our 2nd pick, then I can understand disinterest in drafting a 1st round RB given our need at CB or other sliding talent. Same with conviction that we'll make a trade that acquires us another mid-round pick.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

I feel like you are changing your argument in this thread and sometimes within the same posts. Here are your contradictory posts within this one thread.

###

Okay, we'll see how many wins we get when the running game is weak and pathetic and the offense sputters as Kyler is having an off day or is a little hurt.

Talent at the RB position actually matters.

Day 2, fine, reasonable, but it gives us one pick as an option, where the top RBs will probably be off the board by the time we pick. Scary position to be in.

I really can't fathom this sudden mindset that any ol' player is gonna come in here and tear it up.

If we had a 3rd rounder, it wouldn't be as panicky, but the position is just paper thin. Even scarier if you don't think all that highly of Edmonds.

It's not so much that I desperately want us to pick an RB in the first, it's that in terms of what draft capital we have, we don't have many opportunities to upgrade the position. If you go back to early March and February, when we had a pick in the top 3 rounds, I wasn't pushing to get one that high.

But the way the board is playing out without our 3rd rounder, it looks like the 1st round is going to be our only chance of moving the needle and getting a talented without a ton of luck. The top three backs will likely be gone by #49, and reaching for a Michael Carter or similar in the 2nd isn't a great move.

I'm not asking for a star, I'm asking for adequate production. And I'm asking to hedge our bets a little bit, since Edmonds has already missed 5 career games due to hamstring injuries, which he also had at Fordham.

The only reason I'm arguing for an RB in the first is because we won't have a shot at the top 3 RBs in the second and don't have a third. I'm all for trading back to acquire a 3rd and drafting an RB there. It's simply a matter of the spot we're in, not philosophical support of needing a 1st round RB all the time.

###

You bounce back between you are afraid to lose out on one of the top three because our offense needs a difference maker at RB to you wouldn't be worried about a RB if we had a 3rd round pick because we just need adequate production from our RBs. Which is it?

EDIT: I just don't understand how you are against RB in round 2 when you are ok with a RB in round 1 OR in round 3 (if we had a pick there).

Actually I think he’s been consistent. Overall my interpretation is he hopes to land one of the top three backs and thinks they won’t be there in second round. He doesn’t like any other rb at 49 for value purposes (hence not wanting to spend that pick on a Carter). He’d be okay if we had a third bc maybe he sees a sermon or gainwell as value picks there. I actually kinda agree with this line of reasoning. I like Carter more than sermon or gainwell, but not more than the wrs, cbs, olinemen, dlinemen, edge that are likely available at 49.

 

[football karma]

Late round "big backs" to think of:

Khalil Herbert, VA Tech, 5-9, 212. might be there at 160
Rhamondre Stevenson, OU, 6-0, 246. Likely there at 160
Trey Ragas, LA Tech, 5-10, 230. might be there at 223

not saying these are starters, but guys who can get tough yards and (hopefully) come in late in games when the Cards are up and running out the clock to save wear and tear on Edmonds.

 

[Chopper0080]

How are any of those contradictory? Here are the statements I am making:

- We need an upgrade or alternative to Edmonds at RB.
- I do not envision an upgrade to Edmonds coming from the 5th round or beyond.
- There are three backs worthy of a 1st/2nd round pick. They would represent upgrades at the position.
- These three backs will likely not be available when we pick in the 2nd.
- If they are gone, the remaining backs are probably not worth reaching for compared to other talent on the board and would not be the selection.
- This would leave us without acquiring a potential adequate back for the 2021 season, barring a trade, in my opinion.

If you believe one of the top 3 will fall to the second round, or that the other RBs ranked behind the top 3 are viable targets with our 2nd pick, then I can understand disinterest in drafting a 1st round RB given our need at CB or other sliding talent. Same with conviction that we'll make a trade that acquires us another mid-round pick.

So you would rather reach for a RB with the 16th pick than the 49th pick? How on earth does that make sense?

EDIT: That 100% goes against what all data from the playoff teams shows.

 

[Solar7]

Actually I think he’s been consistent. Overall my interpretation is he hopes to land one of the top three backs and thinks they won’t be there in second round. He doesn’t like any other rb at 49 for value purposes (hence not wanting to spend that pick on a Carter). He’d be okay if we had a third bc maybe he sees a sermon or gainwell as value picks there. I actually kinda agree with this line of reasoning. I like Carter more than sermon or gainwell, but not more than the wrs, cbs, olinemen, dlinemen, edge that are likely available at 49.

Boom.

I would even probably come away reasonably happy with Carter or another RB if we drafted him, even though it was kinda a reach, because at least I'd believe the team believes in him or has a plan for him. But I genuinely think we'll end up backing ourselves into a corner by the end of the draft because I think Keim generally plays the "hope our board falls to us" strategy too often. Many years I feel like we're right on the cusp of getting the guy we would have drafted if he had lasted just a couple more picks. Maybe my gut is wrong.

 

[Solar7]

So you would rather reach for a RB with the 16th pick than the 49th pick? How on earth does that make sense?

EDIT: That 100% goes against what all data from the playoff teams shows.

I don't think an RB at 16 is a reach, is the thing. Najee Harris (not that I clearly prefer him to the other two) would possibly represent the biggest short-term impact player on the board right there in our current situation. Plenty of mocks show him and the other backs going just a few picks after we pick, and all three by the first few picks of round 2. So, I see it as a reach of maybe a few picks, not a round or two like the others options.

It's all well and good that the evidence from the other playoff teams shows that they didn't have first rounders at RB, but we're in a circumstance where we need to do something at a position and have limited resources.

I know plenty of the backs on those playoff teams weren't in the top 3 taken, but we're not looking at 4th or 5th back taken, we're looking at something more akin to 12th-15th back taken.

 

[Ouchie-Z-Clown]

So you would rather reach for a RB with the 16th pick than the 49th pick? How on earth does that make sense?

EDIT: That 100% goes against what all data from the playoff teams shows.

Fair argument. I know in my mind the rationale (right or wrong) would be I’m more comfortable reaching when it’s for the highest tier talent in the category. But the more I think about it, I’m not sure I would do that in all position groups. I have no idea why I’m inclined to do it for a RB. Maybe bc our AZ history has been so desolate in regards to RB.

 

[Solar7]

Fair argument. I know in my mind the rationale (right or wrong) would be I’m more comfortable reaching when it’s for the highest tier talent in the category. But the more I think about it, I’m not sure I would do that in all position groups. I have no idea why I’m inclined to do it for a RB. Maybe bc our AZ history has been so desolate in regards to RB.

It all comes down to the amount of the reach and the top level talent of the player.

And I think it's easier to do with an RB because they interact with the ball the 3rd most on the team. The #1 ranked ILB even if he's not a star compared to other years just isn't as alluring.

 

[Praxis]

I was right all along! Glad we've got an Ojulari to replace Reddick.

 

[PACardsFan]

I was right all along! Glad we've got an Ojulari to replace Reddick.

I think he’s better than his older brother.

 

[SECTION 11]

I was right all along! Glad we've got an Ojulari to replace Reddick.

Bravo!