49ers select Kaelon Black, RB, Indiana at no. 90

Originally posted by Chance:
The pattern was to shorten, not expand. I'm sorry SmokeyJoe, but the weekend awaits.

Post will be here when you get back. Have a good weekend my man.

I originally thought this was a bad pick. But the more I watch his tape the more he reminds me of Gore. If he is anything like Gore then its a great pick

Originally posted by Hangman_52:
I originally thought this was a bad pick. But the more I watch his tape the more he reminds me of Gore. If he is anything like Gore then its a great pick

They got Kaelon by trading down their first round pick to get that extra 3rd rounder to pick Kaelon. I like how they did that because their day one draft record isn't something to write home about. I hope they continue doing that in the future , considering if they make the playoffs again this year - they will be picking in the high twenties again in the first round.

Originally posted by Hangman_52:
I originally thought this was a bad pick. But the more I watch his tape the more he reminds me of Gore. If he is anything like Gore then its a great pick

If he's going to be anything like Gore and faster….I want to hope

Originally posted by Hangman_52:
I originally thought this was a bad pick. But the more I watch his tape the more he reminds me of Gore. If he is anything like Gore then its a great pick

I thought that too initially. Watching him more, he's closer to Mitchell than Gore. Gore ran really low to the ground. Keon runs more upright like Mitchell.

I don't know that he's gonna beat out James, honestly. He looks like he could be a much better pass catcher, but I stick by my initial comments that he runs into backs of linemen a little too much for my liking.

Vision is typically one of those "either you have it or your don't", so I don't know if that can improve much. Hopefully it's better than it looked like on tape. Patience can be improved though.

He looked like a high round 4 guy to me on tape. But hopefully we see better than that in the preseason.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Chance:
In the sake of following your lead, I'll keep it shorter:

1) It's reasonable to assume other teams do as well

2) I said it's possible. Plausible even, if you believe teams exercise every lever of competitive advantage legally available to them.

3) The only constant is change. As more disciples spread across the NFL, the less likely picking a UDFA atop the scrap heap becomes. Notice our recent lack of success here?

Recent lack of success? Were Jordan Mason and Brian Robinson competent players, especially in a backup position? Those were our backups the last three years and they cost you a 6th round pick and very little money for both of them The 49ers have had consistent success here, including recently. Is there another position on the roster the 49ers have had comparable success with such little investment in multiple attempts over a long period of time? I don't think there is.

I wrote:
As more disciples spread across the NFL, the less likely picking a UDFA atop the scrap heap becomes. Notice our recent lack of success here?

I stand by this statement. Robinson is irrelevant to the argument as he was a FA pickup, but I do understand your point. What I'm saying though, is that the claim that we can just pick up UDFAs and call our draft strategy a day, is long in the rear-view for the most part. Mason was four whole years ago, and the most recent success before that was Wilson Jr. which was four years before that. Breida, Mostert even further back. My point is, that over the past decade, the Shanahan tree has spread across the league, taking coaches and FO guys, and the backs that were available on the UDFA scrap heap are much less so today as teams replicate our systems of success. I believe it's as wrong-headed to just think we can supply the position with little investment--especially with the changing NFL devaluation of the position as you noted--just as much as it's wrong-headed to believe we cannot draft a competent player in round three.

If the combine exclusion theory was plausible, surely there'd be some evidence of it happening. Tell me why you think it's plausible mechanically, or in practice. Let's see if we can break down why it doesn't make sense.

I believe teams will use every level of competitive advantage available to them. If that means a rare player that goes under the radar--for example a guy that looks like a men amongst boys at the Senior Bowl but was hidden somewhat on his team's depth chart--gets a team interested enough to try and keep him under the radar, I think team's will use this tool to their advantage. It's a multi-billion dollar game and I'd honestly be pissed if our FO wasn't playing the game to the extent they are capable of.

Regardless, the point is moot. The fact he wasn't invited to the combine was obviously an incorrent assessment, whether teams just somehow missed scouting him correctly, or some may have desired to keep him hidden under the radar as possible. Do you believe teams correctly kept him out of the combine? If so please explain. If not, please let me know how it's relevant to his value, especially post Senior Bowl and Pro-day?

Originally posted by Chance:

I wrote:
As more disciples spread across the NFL, the less likely picking a UDFA atop the scrap heap becomes. Notice our recent lack of success here?

I stand by this statement. Robinson is irrelevant to the argument as he was a FA pickup, but I do understand your point. What I'm saying though, is that the claim that we can just pick up UDFAs and call our draft strategy a day, is long in the rear-view for the most part. Mason was four whole years ago, and the most recent success before that was Wilson Jr. which was four years before that. Breida, Mostert even further back. My point is, that over the past decade, the Shanahan tree has spread across the league, taking coaches and FO guys, and the backs that were available on the UDFA scrap heap are much less so today as teams replicate our systems of success. I believe it's as wrong-headed to just think we can supply the position with little investment--especially with the changing NFL devaluation of the position as you noted--just as much as it's wrong-headed to believe we cannot draft a competent player in round three.

I believe teams will use every level of competitive advantage available to them. If that means a rare player that goes under the radar--for example a guy that looks like a men amongst boys at the Senior Bowl but was hidden somewhat on his team's depth chart--gets a team interested enough to try and keep him under the radar, I think team's will use this tool to their advantage. It's a multi-billion dollar game and I'd honestly be pissed if our FO wasn't playing the game to the extent they are capable of.

Regardless, the point is moot. The fact he wasn't invited to the combine was obviously an incorrent assessment, whether teams just somehow missed scouting him correctly, or some may have desired to keep him hidden under the radar as possible. Do you believe teams correctly kept him out of the combine? If so please explain. If not, please let me know how it's relevant to his value, especially post Senior Bowl and Pro-day?

Robinson isn't irrelevant to the argument, and he wasn't a FA pickup. We used a 6th round pick to trade for him. He's an example of how we were able to competently fill this position with little investment. Something we've done time and time again via the draft, trade, and rookie free agent signings. It's a weak argument to isolate the draft as the only 'relevant' way to fill out a roster.

I understand the general idea that teams will employ strategies to their benefit. We see examples of it every year. But we have no examples of this strategy being employed, so again I ask you to walk through it mechanically. See if we can get to an understanding of why there are no examples of it happening. Try and explain how the strategy is actually employed, what the goal of it would be and whether it can successfully accomplish that goal.

I don't have an opinion on whether he should have been excluded from the combine, but I think it's easy to see why he was. He's going to be a 25 year old rookie at arguably the least valued, least durable, and most replaceable position in the NFL. His most likely best case scenario is a short term contributor who will not be a priority extension going to into his age 29 season.

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Chance:

I wrote:
As more disciples spread across the NFL, the less likely picking a UDFA atop the scrap heap becomes. Notice our recent lack of success here?

I stand by this statement. Robinson is irrelevant to the argument as he was a FA pickup, but I do understand your point. What I'm saying though, is that the claim that we can just pick up UDFAs and call our draft strategy a day, is long in the rear-view for the most part. Mason was four whole years ago, and the most recent success before that was Wilson Jr. which was four years before that. Breida, Mostert even further back. My point is, that over the past decade, the Shanahan tree has spread across the league, taking coaches and FO guys, and the backs that were available on the UDFA scrap heap are much less so today as teams replicate our systems of success. I believe it's as wrong-headed to just think we can supply the position with little investment--especially with the changing NFL devaluation of the position as you noted--just as much as it's wrong-headed to believe we cannot draft a competent player in round three.

I believe teams will use every level of competitive advantage available to them. If that means a rare player that goes under the radar--for example a guy that looks like a men amongst boys at the Senior Bowl but was hidden somewhat on his team's depth chart--gets a team interested enough to try and keep him under the radar, I think team's will use this tool to their advantage. It's a multi-billion dollar game and I'd honestly be pissed if our FO wasn't playing the game to the extent they are capable of.

Regardless, the point is moot. The fact he wasn't invited to the combine was obviously an incorrent assessment, whether teams just somehow missed scouting him correctly, or some may have desired to keep him hidden under the radar as possible. Do you believe teams correctly kept him out of the combine? If so please explain. If not, please let me know how it's relevant to his value, especially post Senior Bowl and Pro-day?

Robinson isn't irrelevant to the argument, and he wasn't a FA pickup. We used a 6th round pick to trade for him. He's an example of how we were able to competently fill this position with little investment. Something we've done time and time again via the draft, trade, and rookie free agent signings. It's a weak argument to isolate the draft as the only 'relevant' way to fill out a roster.

I understand the general idea that teams will employ strategies to their benefit. We see examples of it every year. But we have no examples of this strategy being employed, so again I ask you to walk through it mechanically. See if we can get to an understanding of why there are no examples of it happening. Try and explain how the strategy is actually employed, what the goal of it would be and whether it can successfully accomplish that goal.

I don't have an opinion on whether he should have been excluded from the combine, but I think it's easy to see why he was. He's going to be a 25 year old rookie at arguably the least valued, least durable, and most replaceable position in the NFL. His most likely best case scenario is a short term contributor who will not be a priority extension going to into his age 29 season.

Robinson was just a guy. He was serviceable, but this team needs to be looking at life post CMC (or be finding dynamic players that can be trusted to do what CMC is capable of doing in the run game). If CMC gets injured last year, we do not compete with Robinson. Period. You bet on Black to be a dynamic player in round three, more than you'd find trading a six for a JAG vet. Again, we'll see how it pays off. Higher risk, but higher reward, and in service of extending CMC's career, I think a worthy use of assets if you in fact find a guy that's more dynamic than say a Robinson.

I'm not really interested in pursuing the mechanics of how a team may employ a strategy of using their ability to not invite a player to the combine. I don't really find it relevant to the argument of Black's value. His pro-day serviced as a giant red-blinking light to teams, who somehow may have not been paying attention to his tape or Senior Bowl reps up until that point. The fact he was not invited to the combine proved to be an incorrect decision whether by strategy or by scouting incompetence.

How is RB being the least valuable, least durable, and most replaceable position reasoning for not inviting a prospect to the combine? It's still a position that is important to scout and still draws a lot of player invites. Last year, which was widely considered a weak RB draft class, there were still 21 guys picked to participate. So a guy who looked like a men among boys at the Senior Bowl was somehow not one of those 21 players because??? Who ran for 5.7 per, over a 1k yards, and 8 TDs, on a National Champ team??? Clearly he should have been one of the 21 players invited or guys like Cosell wouldn't have ranked him in his top three at the position after watching his tape.

I notice you continue to ingore any aspect of Black's ability other than his age. The benefit of his age, is he's primed to contribute right away. He has an NFL body right now. He has years of understanding the nuances of the position and will not need the coaching of a raw player that's younger (Guerrendo for example). We already know his capability in blocking, which we all understand is important to KS. But aside from his age, why won't you address his attributes he brings to the position. The best case is he's dynamic and makes it hard for KS to take out of the game. He very well may be that kind of player based on all the things that excited guys who dug into his tape. Even OTC, who notes he may have vision problems, still though he presented 4th round value. And that's the least flattering when you consider JD and Cosell who also dug into his tape and came out with an even higher opinion. I'm sorry, but I just don't find him being 25 compelling enough to disregard all other aspects of his game.

Originally posted by Chance:
Robinson was just a guy. He was serviceable, but this team needs to be looking at life post CMC (or be finding dynamic players that can be trusted to do what CMC is capable of doing in the run game). If CMC gets injured last year, we do not compete with Robinson. Period. You bet on Black to be a dynamic player in round three, more than you'd find trading a six for a JAG vet. Again, we'll see how it pays off. Higher risk, but higher reward, and in service of extending CMC's career, I think a worthy use of assets if you in fact find a guy that's more dynamic than say a Robinson.

I'm not really interested in pursuing the mechanics of how a team may employ a strategy of using their ability to not invite a player to the combine. I don't really find it relevant to the argument of Black's value. His pro-day serviced as a giant red-blinking light to teams, who somehow may have not been paying attention to his tape or Senior Bowl reps up until that point. The fact he was not invited to the combine proved to be an incorrect decision whether by strategy or by scouting incompetence.

How is RB being the least valuable, least durable, and most replaceable position reasoning for not inviting a prospect to the combine? It's still a position that is important to scout and still draws a lot of player invites. Last year, which was widely considered a weak RB draft class, there were still 21 guys picked to participate. So a guy who looked like a men among boys at the Senior Bowl was somehow not one of those 21 players because??? Who ran for 5.7 per, over a 1k yards, and 8 TDs, on a National Champ team??? Clearly he should have been one of the 21 players invited or guys like Cosell wouldn't have ranked him in his top three at the position after watching his tape.

I notice you continue to ingore any aspect of Black's ability other than his age. The benefit of his age, is he's primed to contribute right away. He has an NFL body right now. He has years of understanding the nuances of the position and will not need the coaching of a raw player that's younger (Guerrendo for example). We already know his capability in blocking, which we all understand is important to KS. But aside from his age, why won't you address his attributes he brings to the position. The best case is he's dynamic and makes it hard for KS to take out of the game. He very well may be that kind of player based on all the things that excited guys who dug into his tape. Even OTC, who notes he may have vision problems, still though he presented 4th round value. And that's the least flattering when you consider JD and Cosell who also dug into his tape and came out with an even higher opinion. I'm sorry, but I just don't find him being 25 compelling enough to disregard all other aspects of his game.

Robinson is JAG, which is basically how every non superstar running back has been viewed by NFL teams for years and years now. Jordan Mason, who was our backup for multiple seasons, filled in for CMC and was the league's leading rusher halfway through that season. We let him go, successfully replaced him on the cheap, and he signed a budget deal in free agency. This is standard operating procedure for teams across the league at this position. Of course we weren't going to adequately replace CMC if he got hurt last year… that's because he is an exceptional HOF talent at the position who's impact can only be matched by maybe 2-3 other guys in the NFL (if even that many). Maybe the best receiving back in NFL history. Our offense is centered around him. Absolutely nobody views Black as this kind of talent.

You may not want to pursue the mechanics of the combine exclusion theory, but you are inadvertently showing why it's not actually a worthwhile tactic. It's right there in the bolded portion. What are you hiding by purposefully excluding him from the combine? Nothing, lol. Every team has access to his pro day, his college film, his senior bowl tape and in person scouting, and they have the opportunity to visit with him as a prospect (which many teams did). That's not to mention one team can't exclude him. For him to be excluded that means there was a group of teams who all are employing the same tactic or actually don't view him as a necessary inclusion. This makes the tactic redundant and/or pointless. The 49ers taking him in the 3rd is a clear example! The simple fact is the better a prospect a player is, the more likely they will be at the combine. Every reason why Black would have been excluded is right there in front of us.

Does that mean he won't have an impact? No. But he has to have outlier impact, at outlier age, for this pick to be worthwhile. We are unnecessarily burning valuable resources on what is effectively the cheapest non special teams position in the NFL, and it's especially frustrating because we don't need to look past our own recent history for why it's idiotic. This is why I asked you to clarify what you mean by 'good' (in the context of how good you think he'll be). He has to be exceptional, because non exceptional backs are a dime a dozen.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Unless he becomes a perennial pro bowl player, this pick alone makes me want to fire Lynch. And I've never been a fire-Lynch guy. This is one of the most horrendous picks and wastes of a third I've seen in a long time. Not based on the caliber of the player, but based on the fact that he enters camp as RB5. I MEAN WTF...

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
It's absolutely inexplicable. How tf do we expect this to help us compete with Seattle? HOW??

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
I don't know that he's gonna beat out James, honestly. He looks like he could be a much better pass catcher, but I stick by my initial comments that he runs into backs of linemen a little too much for my liking.

Vision is typically one of those "either you have it or your don't", so I don't know if that can improve much. Hopefully it's better than it looked like on tape. Patience can be improved though.

He looked like a high round 4 guy to me on tape. But hopefully we see better than that in the preseason.

^^^

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by Chance:
Robinson was just a guy. He was serviceable, but this team needs to be looking at life post CMC (or be finding dynamic players that can be trusted to do what CMC is capable of doing in the run game). If CMC gets injured last year, we do not compete with Robinson. Period. You bet on Black to be a dynamic player in round three, more than you'd find trading a six for a JAG vet. Again, we'll see how it pays off. Higher risk, but higher reward, and in service of extending CMC's career, I think a worthy use of assets if you in fact find a guy that's more dynamic than say a Robinson.

I'm not really interested in pursuing the mechanics of how a team may employ a strategy of using their ability to not invite a player to the combine. I don't really find it relevant to the argument of Black's value. His pro-day serviced as a giant red-blinking light to teams, who somehow may have not been paying attention to his tape or Senior Bowl reps up until that point. The fact he was not invited to the combine proved to be an incorrect decision whether by strategy or by scouting incompetence.

How is RB being the least valuable, least durable, and most replaceable position reasoning for not inviting a prospect to the combine? It's still a position that is important to scout and still draws a lot of player invites. Last year, which was widely considered a weak RB draft class, there were still 21 guys picked to participate. So a guy who looked like a men among boys at the Senior Bowl was somehow not one of those 21 players because??? Who ran for 5.7 per, over a 1k yards, and 8 TDs, on a National Champ team??? Clearly he should have been one of the 21 players invited or guys like Cosell wouldn't have ranked him in his top three at the position after watching his tape.

I notice you continue to ingore any aspect of Black's ability other than his age. The benefit of his age, is he's primed to contribute right away. He has an NFL body right now. He has years of understanding the nuances of the position and will not need the coaching of a raw player that's younger (Guerrendo for example). We already know his capability in blocking, which we all understand is important to KS. But aside from his age, why won't you address his attributes he brings to the position. The best case is he's dynamic and makes it hard for KS to take out of the game. He very well may be that kind of player based on all the things that excited guys who dug into his tape. Even OTC, who notes he may have vision problems, still though he presented 4th round value. And that's the least flattering when you consider JD and Cosell who also dug into his tape and came out with an even higher opinion. I'm sorry, but I just don't find him being 25 compelling enough to disregard all other aspects of his game.

Robinson is JAG, which is basically how every non superstar running back has been viewed by NFL teams for years and years now. Jordan Mason, who was our backup for multiple seasons, filled in for CMC and was the league's leading rusher halfway through that season. We let him go, successfully replaced him on the cheap, and he signed a budget deal in free agency. This is standard operating procedure for teams across the league at this position. Of course we weren't going to adequately replace CMC if he got hurt last year… that's because he is an exceptional HOF talent at the position who's impact can only be matched by maybe 2-3 other guys in the NFL (if even that many). Maybe the best receiving back in NFL history. Our offense is centered around him. Absolutely nobody views Black as this kind of talent.

Black doesn't need to be a HOF level talent to be vastly superior to Mason or Robinson. Surely you can recognize the fallacy of this binary argument you are presenting? If Mason or Robinson were worth the relative pittance it would have taken to retain either, the team would have. I believe they didn't because they want a baller behind CMC, a guy who can run just as well as CMC is able to right now, and can be trusted to do the little things that a RB needs to do in a KS offense (like pass blocking).

You may not want to pursue the mechanics of the combine exclusion theory, but you are inadvertently showing why it's not actually a worthwhile tactic. It's right there in the bolded portion. What are you hiding by purposefully excluding him from the combine? Nothing, lol. Every team has access to his pro day, his college film, his senior bowl tape and in person scouting, and they have the opportunity to visit with him as a prospect (which many teams did). That's not to mention one team can't exclude him. For him to be excluded that means there was a group of teams who all are employing the same tactic or actually don't view him as a necessary inclusion. This makes the tactic redundant and/or pointless. The 49ers taking him in the 3rd is a clear example! The simple fact is the better a prospect a player is, the more likely they will be at the combine. Every reason why Black would have been excluded is right there in front of us.

I don't want to discuss the mechanics, because, again, I believe it to be wholly irrelevant. His tape showed a draftable talent, his senior bowl reps showed a draftable talent, and his pro-day showed a draftable talent. Whether his initial exclusion from the combine was due to scouting incompetence, a desire to keep him under the radar, or a combination of both, by the time of his elite pro-day, the cat was out of the bag and his value elevated.

Does that mean he won't have an impact? No. But he has to have outlier impact, at outlier age, for this pick to be worthwhile. We are unnecessarily burning valuable resources on what is effectively the cheapest non special teams position in the NFL, and it's especially frustrating because we don't need to look past our own recent history for why it's idiotic. This is why I asked you to clarify what you mean by 'good' (in the context of how good you think he'll be). He has to be exceptional, because non exceptional backs are a dime a dozen.

Good: Better than a JAG like Robinson. A guy that gives CMC meaningful rest while being entrusted to protect Brock, run for good yardage, and be a legit threat in the passing game. A guy who may be able to even weather the storm should CMC go down for an extended period of time. If your scouting department views him as RB2, even in a weak class, I think the expectation is that he could become exceptional, or at the very least somewhere between exceptional and the backs that are a dime a dozen (which is a range that isn't as binary as you're presenting).

Other than him being 25, what exactly are his clear deficiencies as a RB? Why did this team get it wrong that he's RB2? Why does Cosell get it wrong that he's RB3? What is JohnnyDel missing from his senior bowl analysis and deep dive into his reps? Is it simply that he's 25? Does that encapsulate your entire critique of Black?

Originally posted by SmokeyJoe:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Unless he becomes a perennial pro bowl player, this pick alone makes me want to fire Lynch. And I've never been a fire-Lynch guy. This is one of the most horrendous picks and wastes of a third I've seen in a long time. Not based on the caliber of the player, but based on the fact that he enters camp as RB5. I MEAN WTF...

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

It's absolutely inexplicable. How tf do we expect this to help us compete with Seattle? HOW??

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

I don't know that he's gonna beat out James, honestly. He looks like he could be a much better pass catcher, but I stick by my initial comments that he runs into backs of linemen a little too much for my liking.

Vision is typically one of those "either you have it or your don't", so I don't know if that can improve much. Hopefully it's better than it looked like on tape. Patience can be improved though.

He looked like a high round 4 guy to me on tape. But hopefully we see better than that in the preseason.

^^^

Standing by it! Hope he proves me wrong!

Originally posted by Chance:
Black doesn't need to be a HOF level talent to be vastly superior to Mason or Robinson. Surely you can recognize the fallacy of this binary argument you are presenting? If Mason or Robinson were worth the relative pittance it would have taken to retain either, the team would have. I believe they didn't because they want a baller behind CMC, a guy who can run just as well as CMC is able to right now, and can be trusted to do the little things that a RB needs to do in a KS offense (like pass blocking).

I don't want to discuss the mechanics, because, again, I believe it to be wholly irrelevant. His tape showed a draftable talent, his senior bowl reps showed a draftable talent, and his pro-day showed a draftable talent. Whether his initial exclusion from the combine was due to scouting incompetence, a desire to keep him under the radar, or a combination of both, by the time of his elite pro-day, the cat was out of the bag and his value elevated.

Good: Better than a JAG like Robinson. A guy that gives CMC meaningful rest while being entrusted to protect Brock, run for good yardage, and be a legit threat in the passing game. A guy who may be able to even weather the storm should CMC go down for an extended period of time. If your scouting department views him as RB2, even in a weak class, I think the expectation is that he could become exceptional, or at the very least somewhere between exceptional and the backs that are a dime a dozen (which is a range that isn't as binary as you're presenting).

Other than him being 25, what exactly are his clear deficiencies as a RB? Why did this team get it wrong that he's RB2? Why does Cosell get it wrong that he's RB3? What is JohnnyDel missing from his senior bowl analysis and deep dive into his reps? Is it simply that he's 25? Does that encapsulate your entire critique of Black?

You're missing the point. He doesn't need to be a HoF talent to be better than those players, but he needs to be a special player to not get replaced in the same fashion they were. They didn't move on from those players strictly because they weren't good enough. They moved on because they are replaceable (and because the 49ers were already heavily invested in the position with their unique, game changing, starter). That's how this position is handled across the league. That's how the 49ers have handled this position outside of CMC (who is indeed a HoF talent). This will not change with Black when he is entering his 29 year old season.

You are singularly focused on [projected] ability, and completely discarding the concept of value. That's why I highlighted OTC's posts after you cited his evaluation. OTC's posts show a clear differentiation between viewing his tape, and understanding the value of the asset we used to acquire him - 'unless he is a perennial pro bowl level player… this is one of the most horrendous picks and wastes of a 3rd I've seen in a long time. Not based on the caliber of player'.

This isn't solely directed at you Chance, but I don't know why positional and draft value is suddenly being treated like a foreign concept among a handful of posters here. We're discarding clearly visible trends that have been in place for years in the NFL including our own team's recent history, pretending being 25 as a rookie at the mf'ing RB position isn't a negative, cherry picking evaluations and even twisting the opinions of those evaluators, and endorsing (and misrepresenting) the plausibility of hair-brained theories about how teams might handle combine invites with no evidence, simply to justify yet another midround RB selection from a group that has routinely misstepped in this same area.

Like I already said earlier, I'll wait to see what he actually becomes as a player (his ability). And I'll wait to see how the team handles him as he finishes his rookie deal at an especially advanced age for the position, and what else was available when we decided we had to have him in the 3rd round (value).

All that said, I should probably add that this is a conversation better suited for the Lynch and/or Shanahan threads. I don't want to crush this kid because our front office doesn't learn from their mistakes (or successes). Hopefully he makes an impact whether he becomes an outlier at the position (like our current starter) or he's just another competent back on a cheap deal for a few years.