|
Post by patriotsk1d on Jan 3, 2015 15:56:35 GMT -5
Gurley is extremely talented number 1 back in this class IMO, but that ACL tear is going to hurt his stock in a very deep RB class. Gordon will be the only 1st round back.
|
|
|
Post by Morkim on Jan 3, 2015 16:18:21 GMT -5
Gurley is extremely talented number 1 back in this class IMO, but that ACL tear is going to hurt his stock in a very deep RB class. Gordon will be the only 1st round back. My thoughts exactly, although I expect someone to trade with the pats to jump into the 32 spot for him.
|
|
|
Post by patriotsk1d on Jan 3, 2015 16:21:32 GMT -5
Gurley is extremely talented number 1 back in this class IMO, but that ACL tear is going to hurt his stock in a very deep RB class. Gordon will be the only 1st round back. My thoughts exactly, although I expect someone to trade with the pats to jump into the 32 spot for him. I would take him depending on what happens with Ridley and Vereen. Ridley will be coming off a torn ACL, so we can probably get incredible value on a one year deal. Vereen probably walks as White is being groomed as a replacement. Blount is under contract. Still Gurley would be really good value if his knee checks out.
|
|
Beastified
College Backup
I like chicken smegma
Posts: 418
|
Post by Beastified on Jan 3, 2015 20:50:39 GMT -5
I'm the only person here who voted for Gurley, and I know I made the case on here yesterday, but here is my argument: Todd Gurley weighs 227 pounds. Marshawn Lynch weighs 215. Melvin Gordon weighs 204. We're talking about a new breed of power back right here. Gurley really can combine the power that Jerome Bettis ran with and the exclusivity of Chris Johnson or Bo Jackson. He's going to run the 40 at 4.3X once he's healthy, and Gordon probably won't break 4.30, so while Gordon is clearly faster in a straight line, the difference won't be dramatic. Todd Gurley is the better prospect in terms of talent alone, and very few dispute that. He was projected as a first round pick, somtimes a top 5 selection before his injury this year. Melvin Gordon was an amazing runningback for Wisconsin. To put that in perspective, Jahvid Best was amazing for Cal, Reggie Bush was amazing for USC and Andre Williams was amazing for Boston College too, and Gordon doesn't scream more talented than any of them, despite them clearly not being great NFL talent. Many runningbacks who were amazing as amateurs don't pan out, and many who were not impressive in college like Chris Johnson, Jamaal Charles and Matt Forte end up becoming elite runningbacks in the NFL. I realize that it's hard to do forget how amazing Gordon was at Wisconsin because the season just ended, but I think in May, NFL teams who are MUCH smarter than me are going to come to the same conclusion that because Gurley is the better prospect if you ignore college production, then he's the first RB to go off the board. The ONLY reason I see Gurley falling in the draft is his health. We still don't know his timetable and if he can't play next season, then of course he could fall past Gordon. I think he will be on the path to recovery to the point where a team will take him first. We saw with Marcus Lattimore that this wasn't the case. Lattimore wasn't a first round pick candidate even before his injury, and since the 49ers knew Gore was their starter anyway, they took him not extremely far after where he would have landed had he been totally recovered. To wrap up, these players aren't being evaluated fairly. People see that Gordon was more productive in school than Gurley and assuming he'll go first, but that's clearly not what teams go by. Bishop Sankey was the first runningback taken ahead of Carlos Hyde and Jeremy Hill. Kellen Clemons and Case Keenum both went undrafted despite being the two best college QBs of all time. Skills and potential are 100% of the conversation, period. Gurley has comparable speed and exclusivity, but completely unique power compared to every other back in college right now. Gordon is more patient and finds holes that no one else can see, and he's VERY fast. Those things can make him great, but patience can be taught and if Gurley can demonstrate it, he's the more talented of the two backs. Edit: On the other 2 questions, I think Gurley goes in the last 10 picks of round 1, Gordon goes at the end of round 2 or maybe the beginning if 3. Marcus Lattimore was considered a 1st rd pick pre-injury if I remember correctly. Hyde and Hill seem to have better futures than Sankey, who was extremely unimpressive his rookie year.
Also, have you watched Melvin Gordon run? Dude, he's not another Montee Ball. The guy is an elite talent just like Gurley. He will not drop out of the 1st rd, there is just no way possible.
|
|
|
Post by MarchingOn on Jan 3, 2015 21:03:57 GMT -5
I'm the only person here who voted for Gurley, and I know I made the case on here yesterday, but here is my argument: Todd Gurley weighs 227 pounds. Marshawn Lynch weighs 215. Melvin Gordon weighs 204. We're talking about a new breed of power back right here. Gurley really can combine the power that Jerome Bettis ran with and the exclusivity of Chris Johnson or Bo Jackson. He's going to run the 40 at 4.3X once he's healthy, and Gordon probably won't break 4.30, so while Gordon is clearly faster in a straight line, the difference won't be dramatic. Todd Gurley is the better prospect in terms of talent alone, and very few dispute that. He was projected as a first round pick, somtimes a top 5 selection before his injury this year. Melvin Gordon was an amazing runningback for Wisconsin. To put that in perspective, Jahvid Best was amazing for Cal, Reggie Bush was amazing for USC and Andre Williams was amazing for Boston College too, and Gordon doesn't scream more talented than any of them, despite them clearly not being great NFL talent. Many runningbacks who were amazing as amateurs don't pan out, and many who were not impressive in college like Chris Johnson, Jamaal Charles and Matt Forte end up becoming elite runningbacks in the NFL. I realize that it's hard to do forget how amazing Gordon was at Wisconsin because the season just ended, but I think in May, NFL teams who are MUCH smarter than me are going to come to the same conclusion that because Gurley is the better prospect if you ignore college production, then he's the first RB to go off the board. The ONLY reason I see Gurley falling in the draft is his health. We still don't know his timetable and if he can't play next season, then of course he could fall past Gordon. I think he will be on the path to recovery to the point where a team will take him first. We saw with Marcus Lattimore that this wasn't the case. Lattimore wasn't a first round pick candidate even before his injury, and since the 49ers knew Gore was their starter anyway, they took him not extremely far after where he would have landed had he been totally recovered. To wrap up, these players aren't being evaluated fairly. People see that Gordon was more productive in school than Gurley and assuming he'll go first, but that's clearly not what teams go by. Bishop Sankey was the first runningback taken ahead of Carlos Hyde and Jeremy Hill. Kellen Clemons and Case Keenum both went undrafted despite being the two best college QBs of all time. Skills and potential are 100% of the conversation, period. Gurley has comparable speed and exclusivity, but completely unique power compared to every other back in college right now. Gordon is more patient and finds holes that no one else can see, and he's VERY fast. Those things can make him great, but patience can be taught and if Gurley can demonstrate it, he's the more talented of the two backs. Edit: On the other 2 questions, I think Gurley goes in the last 10 picks of round 1, Gordon goes at the end of round 2 or maybe the beginning if 3. Marcus Lattimore was considered a 1st rd pick pre-injury if I remember correctly. Hyde and Hill seem to have better futures than Sankey, who was extremely unimpressive his rookie year.
Also, have you watched Melvin Gordon run? Dude, he's not another Montee Ball. The guy is an elite talent just like Gurley. He will not drop out of the 1st rd, there is just no way possible.
This. Gordon has the elite talent and ability to go along with the production. The Jahvid Best and Andre Williams comparisons aren't apt. Also, Juggs, it's absurd to believe Gurley is going to run anywhere near 4.3 in the fourty yard dash. Jamaal Charles ran a 4.38.. To even INSINUATE that Gurley has anywhere near the same speed as Charles is, again, downright absurd. I guarantee Gordon runs a better 40 than Gurley.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jan 3, 2015 21:29:51 GMT -5
MarchingOnJamaal Charles ran a terrible 40. Steven Jackson ran a 4.41. That's a better comparison. And I SAID that Gordon would run faster. 4.3X means something between 4.30 and 4.39. I think Gurley runs a high 4.3 and Gordon goes low 4.3. That's what I mean when I say comparable speed.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jan 3, 2015 21:30:54 GMT -5
Beast there's no point quoting me, I have you blocked so I don't even get notifications. I only saw it because MO quoted you. I didn't compare Gordon to Best or Williams. I said that they had a lot of college success but didn't pan out. In fact, EVERY one of your criticisms were irrelevant to what I wrote and could be solved if you read more carefully. I didn't say Sankey was better than Hill or Hyde. I said he got drafted first. And I didn't say anything about Lattimore's draft expectations. I just said that he ended up sliding on draft day. Please do a better job of reading if you're going to nitpick.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jan 3, 2015 21:36:33 GMT -5
Actaully, I recant that last part. I did say Lattimore wasn't a first round pick before the injury, and that was dumb. I really don't know why I wrote that lol. But I never even implied that Melvin Gordon was like Montee Ball. I don't know where you got that.
|
|
|
Post by MarchingOn on Jan 3, 2015 21:36:49 GMT -5
MarchingOnJamaal Charles ran a terrible 40. Steven Jackson ran a 4.41. That's a better comparison. And I SAID that Gordon would run faster. 4.3X means something between 4.30 and 4.39. I think Gurley runs a high 4.3 and Gordon goes low 4.3. That's what I mean when I say comparable speed. They're not even comparable though. Gurley's just not a 4.3 guy in any way, shape, or form imo. I'm not saying he's slow as Christmas, but he's not 4.3. Of course, I have no way to prove this. But nothing screams 4.3 whenever I watch him play. We'll just have to see what happens at the combine, I guess.
|
|
|
Post by Juggs on Jan 3, 2015 21:40:47 GMT -5
MarchingOnJamaal Charles ran a terrible 40. Steven Jackson ran a 4.41. That's a better comparison. And I SAID that Gordon would run faster. 4.3X means something between 4.30 and 4.39. I think Gurley runs a high 4.3 and Gordon goes low 4.3. That's what I mean when I say comparable speed. They're not even comparable though. Gurley's just not a 4.3 guy in any way, shape, or form imo. I'm not saying he's slow as Christmas, but he's not 4.3. Of course, I have no way to prove this. But nothing screams 4.3 whenever I watch him play. We'll just have to see what happens at the combine, I guess. Yeah, that's the thing. You wouldn't think that when you watch JC, he's only a 4.38 either. He looks like a 4.2X when he plays. And it's not like his speed even matters the way he plays. It's really hard to guess a players 40 time off tape, and so I guess that was dumb of me to write. However, there's not another good way to express that his speed is underrated. Another good complaint against me is that the most likely thing not to be recoverable (is that a word lol?) would be top speed for Gurley after the ACL tear. He might have run a 4.3 junior year and be 4.45 in May.
|
|