John Dorsey and the Cleveland Browns

[Jerellh528]

Dillon wasn't drafted for insurance. He was drafted to replace RBs in their contract years.

thank you! No way they spend a second rounder on insurance. They won’t re-sign Jones nor should they.

 

[swhitset]

Ok, then I won't convince you.

best response I’ve seen in here in a while.

 

[Deleted member 6794]

At any rate, my point stands. Draft capital means something. Not always, but most of the time. AJ will get his time to show what he can do, he has to or else Aaron Jones will price himself out of Green Bay. With his performance last week he may have already done so.

I agree that the chances of drafting an impact running back early are higher than selecting one on day three as well. My point being that it's not as improbable as at other positions to find a gem after the conclusion of the third round though.

Nothing weird about it at all. A running back that has the ball handed to him on the 2 yard line and manages to get those 2 yards... scores a TD, but if he is only getting 2-3 yards in the middle of the field... that’s not so great. Without digging into the numbers (i’ll defer to someone like Captain Wimm for that) I suspect Gordon is slightly better than my example, but certainly not in the elite RB category.

Gordon has scored 22 touchdowns from one or two yards.

Outside the red zone he has averaged only 4.27 yards per carry though, which ranks 35th among 43 running backs with at least 400 carries in that area.

The statements are "top back" and "elite production". You won't be able to convince me that a player with 50 touchdowns over 4 years is not a top back in the NFL. That's what you want from these guys. At the end of the day you want them to punch it into the endzone. He's done that better than most backs in the NFL. Aka, he's been a top back. Given that he's scored more TD's at the RB position than most other RB's, I'd say that's elite production. Now this year is a different story.

The number of touchdowns isn't a great mertic to measure the success of a running back. Take a look at the stats above.

 

[GleefulGary]

The statements are "top back" and "elite production". You won't be able to convince me that a player with 50 touchdowns over 4 years is not a top back in the NFL. That's what you want from these guys. At the end of the day you want them to punch it into the endzone. He's done that better than most backs in the NFL. Aka, he's been a top back. Given that he's scored more TD's at the RB position than most other RB's, I'd say that's elite production. Now this year is a different story.

Was LeGarrette Blount an elite back when he led the league in rushing TD's?

 

[GreenNGold_81]

Was LeGarrette Blount an elite back when he led the league in rushing TD's?

He would have had "elite production". Yes. Are you actually trying to argue that a player who leads the league in touchdowns is not producing at an elite level?

 

[Dantés]

He would have had "elite production". Yes. Are you actually trying to argue that a player who leads the league in touchdowns is not producing at an elite level?

Elite production, however we would define that, is not the same thing as an elite player or an elite talent.

No one can deny that Gordon produced a lot of touchdowns. If that's all you mean, then fine. But I and many others would deny that his TD production makes him a good player.

 

[GreenNGold_81]

Elite production, however we would define that, is not the same thing as an elite player or an elite talent.

No one can deny that Gordon produced a lot of touchdowns. If that's all you mean, then fine. But I and many others would deny that his TD production makes him a good player.

So, given that the average lifespan of an NFL career is 3.3 years, one would assume that a player who was drafted in 2015 and still a starting NFL RB is at least "good".

 

[swhitset]

So, given that the average lifespan of an NFL career is 3.3 years, one would assume that a player who was drafted in 2015 and still a starting NFL RB is at least "good".

Not sure how any answer to that question would elevate Gordon to “elite”.

 

[Dantés]

So, given that the average lifespan of an NFL career is 3.3 years, one would assume that a player who was drafted in 2015 and still a starting NFL RB is at least "good".

Part of the problem is that the terms we use are very malleable. "Elite." "Great." "Top." "Good."

These are all going to mean different things to different posters.

Having watched a ton of Gordon snaps, my opinion is that he was an average player and talent at his position.

I mean, outside of an outlier year (2018), in which he was 8th in yards per carry (and in which his backup actually was slightly better on 100+ carries), he was dreadfully inefficient. Just look:

2015: 3.5 YPC, 43rd
2016: 3.9 YPC, 29th
2017: 3.9 YPC, 26th
2019: 3.8 YPC, 36th

Those are his ranks compared to other running backs (QB's excluded) to have had at least 100 carries in that particular season.

People might point to his work in the passing game, and he's a decent receiver for the position, but there too he has not been efficient very often. For example, his 7.0 yards/reception last year was 24th among running backs.

These numbers are indicative of why I say he's not been a good player, rather he's been a high volume player.