Originally Posted by Psyko Tek (Post 9991763)

I did not think of the price factor
you could run the guy to death in his first contract and then let him go

gawd, I hate to think that way

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 9992385)

Maybe I interpret the whole "first round" or "top ten" thing differently from other people.

For example, is Dwayne Bowe worth a top-ten pick?

In a draft where these guys are the top 12 prospects, the answer is yes.

Dwayne Bowe
Mike Mamula
Tony Mandarich
Trezelle Jenkins
Jon Baldwin
Ryan Leaf
Jamarcus Russell
Rashaun Woods
Freddie Mitchell
Matt Jones
Jarvis Moss
Ron Dayne

In a draft where these guys are the top 12 prospects, the answer is no.

Dwayne Bowe
Dan Marino
Adrian Peterson
Walter Payton
Reggie White
Lawrence Taylor
Anthony Munoz
Joe Montana
Walter Payton
Jerry Rice
Tony Gonzalez
Dick Butkus

"Worth a top-ten pick" is purely a function of who the other top players are. If it's a weak draft class, someone is worth a top-ten pick even if they're going to be a below-average NFL player, as long as they're one of the ten best prospects.

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 9993122)

IMO, the poll question is whether or not you should put a RB that high on your board in the first place.

Originally Posted by taterhog (Post 9993574)

You have Payton listed twice in un-relatable scenario #2. lol

Originally Posted by Rain Man (Post 9993578)

He's really that good.

Originally Posted by taterhog (Post 9993583)

Only if he can play special teams

Originally Posted by Chief Roundup (Post 9993468)

The value of the RB position is horribly low. Probably the lowest it has ever been.
When you combine the value of the position in todays NFL along with all of the successful backs from mid rounds it is hard to spend a 1st round pick on one at all let alone a top ten pick on a RB.

Originally Posted by lcarus (Post 9993668)

What about someone like LeSean McCoy? Someone who is great at running the ball AND great as a receiver out of the backfield. If you planned on running an offense suited for a back like that, would you consider him worthy of a top 10 selection?

Originally Posted by keg in kc (Post 9992405)

I don't know that I agree that it's necessarily more risky, but the RB position has grown increasingly devalued while the QB has gone the other direction, so the potential reward isn't really even close to equivalent. Just look at Minnesota... Best RB in the league, but they have yet to become a contender without a quality signal caller. A biblical home run at RB doesn't protect them from a failure to find a solution behind center. A fact which pretty clearly shows both the risk inherent at QB as well as the value of both positions.

Too many people focus just on the risk half of the equation and ignore the reward factor. Missing 3 out of 4 times on a QB will ultimately put you ahead of teams that hit on lesser positions. Because that one hit changes the entire dynamic of a franchise, and puts them in the catbird seat for a decade.