Josh Jacobs: Moving On Up

[grandmabetty]

Just traded baker for jacobs straight up in SF. That was less about my belief in jacobs than it was in the fact that good RBs are so hard to find and baker not being all that great. I also had 1.02 and 1.04 and drafted lance and fields

[Pullo Vision]

Just traded baker for jacobs straight up in SF. That was less about my belief in jacobs than it was in the fact that good RBs are so hard to find and baker not being all that great. I also had 1.02 and 1.04 and drafted lance and fields

I have Mayfield in a 1 QB and can understand being unenthusiastic about him. In a 2QB/SF, it's interesting to trade a young QB for a young RB. I'd think Mayfield has less long term concerns- I'd be happy with his floor/ceiling combo in SF. Having those picks definitely makes the trade make sense.

[ArrylT]

If anyone has followed the Travis Etienne / Josh Robinson threads - there has been a lot of talk about what Urban Meyer will do. I think the answer to this question is dependant on what Jon Gruden wants to do. And history (both past & recent) suggests that Gruden wants to run run run the ball. Gruden wants a 1A/ 1B rb attack. Whether that is Wheatley/Kauffman, Wheatley/Garner, Pittman/Alstott, or Williams/Pittman - he wants 2 RBs. And then the 3rd RB gets a fair share of the passing game looks (in thie case it is Richard - who btw has more receiving targets over his career than Drake).

Furthermore - one way to improve your defence is to keep the ball - and you do that by controlling the tempo - which means running more. Not to mention the Raiders do not (yet) have a dominant passing attack (despite having a continually underrated QB) - so again a stronger run game in turn helps the play action and helps the pass.

Now some may feel this means uh oh time to ding Jacobs even more - but it certainly did not affect Chubb or Hunt last year.

But this what I am predicting. Jacobs with 220-260 carries and Drake with another 120-140 (The Browns had 388 carries last year) - basically a better Devantae Booker. With both having improved efficiency.

How it will play out will obviously depend on the health of the RBs and how the games go. A "battle plan" never survives past the initial stages - so don't be surprised if Jacobs ends up dominating the touches due to poor health/performance on Drake (or vice versa). Personally I think Jacobs is the better back, and Richard is a better 3rd down back than Drake, so it is certainly within my realm of expectations to see Drake get squeezed. But I think the most likely outcome, assuming one or the other misses time is a similar result to what you saw with Chubb/Hunt last year.

Long term it does not change my outlook or value on Jacobs because he still projects to have multiple years on that RB1/RB2 zone. I'll adjust if need be after we see exactly how effective Drake is - but I dont see an impediment to his continuing to have 1000 yard seasons with 8-12 TDs and 30-40 receptions (just like Hunt hasnt been an impediment to Chubb).

[Patsfan86]

I traded away Javonte Williams, who i took at 1.05, for Jacobs and a 2022 2nd. I actually thought that was a slight overpay for Williams since he hasnt played a snap in the NFL but this thread may disagree with me.

[Ice]

I traded away Javonte Williams, who i took at 1.05, for Jacobs and a 2022 2nd. I actually thought that was a slight overpay for Williams since he hasnt played a snap in the NFL but this thread may disagree with me.

I like the Jacobs side by a lot. A little surprised as the pick should have gone the other way at the very least IMO.

[dipANDglide]

Buy low. I'd trade away guys like Etienne, Williams, and the like all day for Jacobs.

[The MAC Machine]

What is the value difference (in players or picks) between Jacobs and Chubb?

I ask because Chubb outproduced Jacobs last year in 4 less games. But both still managed to be top 10 (or close to top 10) RBs.

[Ice]

What is the value difference (in players or picks) between Jacobs and Chubb?

I ask because Chubb outproduced Jacobs last year in 4 less games. But both still managed to be top 10 (or close to top 10) RBs.

Pretty good question. I see Chubb as a plus 2 point per game player so by my book that is a late first pick plus Jacobs to get Chubb. 2 points per game is a pretty big spread in fantasy.

That said, I doubt many would pay Jacobs and a late first at this point given Chubb's situation.

[Vcize]

Just traded baker for jacobs straight up in SF. That was less about my belief in jacobs than it was in the fact that good RBs are so hard to find and baker not being all that great. I also had 1.02 and 1.04 and drafted lance and fields

I have Mayfield in a 1 QB and can understand being unenthusiastic about him. In a 2QB/SF, it's interesting to trade a young QB for a young RB. I'd think Mayfield has less long term concerns- I'd be happy with his floor/ceiling combo in SF. Having those picks definitely makes the trade make sense.

I think Baker's age is mostly irrelevant because he's far more likely to one day have no value because he doesn't play than he is to lose value because he's old.

Guys like Baker who do just enough to hold on don't tend to really last long in the NFL. They tend to hang on to the job so long as things are going well for the team, but as soon as things turn south the QB is the first thing to be replaced and I don't exactly expect Cleveland to be the place that holds it all together for a decade without any bumps in the road.

He reminds of guys like Mariota, Garoppolo, Dalton, Trubisky, etc. At some point within the last 2-4 years each of these guys were doing "good enough" to feel like they had a secure starting job because the team was still making the playoffs and they weren't dead terrible. But as soon as the team reverted a bit they were cast aside in an instant.

I think it's far more likely we'll see the same happen to Baker than the likelihood that Cleveland keeps going 11-5 every year so everyone continues to be fine with a QB that throws for 3500 yards and 24 TDs a year in the modern NFL.

[StripesOfKC]

Just traded baker for jacobs straight up in SF. That was less about my belief in jacobs than it was in the fact that good RBs are so hard to find and baker not being all that great. I also had 1.02 and 1.04 and drafted lance and fields

I have Mayfield in a 1 QB and can understand being unenthusiastic about him. In a 2QB/SF, it's interesting to trade a young QB for a young RB. I'd think Mayfield has less long term concerns- I'd be happy with his floor/ceiling combo in SF. Having those picks definitely makes the trade make sense.

I think Baker's age is mostly irrelevant because he's far more likely to one day have no value because he doesn't play than he is to lose value because he's old.

Guys like Baker who do just enough to hold on don't tend to really last long in the NFL. They tend to hang on to the job so long as things are going well for the team, but as soon as things turn south the QB is the first thing to be replaced and I don't exactly expect Cleveland to be the place that holds it all together for a decade without any bumps in the road.

He reminds of guys like Mariota, Garoppolo, Dalton, Trubisky, etc. At some point within the last 2-4 years each of these guys were doing "good enough" to feel like they had a secure starting job because the team was still making the playoffs and they weren't dead terrible. But as soon as the team reverted a bit they were cast aside in an instant.

I think it's far more likely we'll see the same happen to Baker than the likelihood that Cleveland keeps going 11-5 every year so everyone continues to be fine with a QB that throws for 3500 yards and 24 TDs a year in the modern NFL.

Except Baker was great last year. His stats were meh because of volume (scheme) not his ability or efficiency

[Bronco Billy]

I have Mayfield in a 1 QB and can understand being unenthusiastic about him. In a 2QB/SF, it's interesting to trade a young QB for a young RB. I'd think Mayfield has less long term concerns- I'd be happy with his floor/ceiling combo in SF. Having those picks definitely makes the trade make sense.

I think Baker's age is mostly irrelevant because he's far more likely to one day have no value because he doesn't play than he is to lose value because he's old.

Guys like Baker who do just enough to hold on don't tend to really last long in the NFL. They tend to hang on to the job so long as things are going well for the team, but as soon as things turn south the QB is the first thing to be replaced and I don't exactly expect Cleveland to be the place that holds it all together for a decade without any bumps in the road.

He reminds of guys like Mariota, Garoppolo, Dalton, Trubisky, etc. At some point within the last 2-4 years each of these guys were doing "good enough" to feel like they had a secure starting job because the team was still making the playoffs and they weren't dead terrible. But as soon as the team reverted a bit they were cast aside in an instant.

I think it's far more likely we'll see the same happen to Baker than the likelihood that Cleveland keeps going 11-5 every year so everyone continues to be fine with a QB that throws for 3500 yards and 24 TDs a year in the modern NFL.

Except Baker was great last year. His stats were meh because of volume (scheme) not his ability or efficiency

Agreed. That was a really peculiar comparison of the QBs he picked as comps to Mayfield. Except for the Jets game he was lights out in the stretch last season. He’s come a long way and had a very strong year last year - not bad considering that he’s only had 3 seasons in the league (and under 4 different HCs). Awfully early to be throwing him on the QB trash heap.

[Ice]

Baker did play good enough to get his 5th year option but it is obvious the Browns want him to prove the improvement he showed is worth a new long term deal. The floor of a new deal will probably be 35 million per year and I can see why the team is concerned. If he plays poorly this year he could be going down the path of the QB's being compared by Vcise after this season.

I think he will breakout personally and get a big contract now that there is some stability in that organization but he is on a prove it deal at this point so there is some risk.

[DLF3000]

Buy low. I'd trade away guys like Etienne, Williams, and the like all day for Jacobs.

Not me. Never liked Jacobs. To be fair, none of these three overly excite me. It's that kind of RB year for me, so few I'm high on - though we'll see how the next few years go for these guys.

[ColdZealDonkeyStrike]

Now some may feel this means uh oh time to ding Jacobs even more - but it certainly did not affect Chubb or Hunt last year.
...

(just like Hunt hasnt been an impediment to Chubb).

Chubb is still an RB1 despite a non ideal role, but that's because he's Nick Freakin' Chubb, probably the best pure rusher in Football. To be an RB1 in a split role without receiving work, you have to either be a Nick Chubb level talent, or be on a crazy good offense and get a bunch of goal line work.
Jacobs is not either of those things. He has only been good for fantasy due to volume to date. He's the anti-Nick Chubb.

[Ice]

Now some may feel this means uh oh time to ding Jacobs even more - but it certainly did not affect Chubb or Hunt last year.
...

(just like Hunt hasnt been an impediment to Chubb).

Chubb is still an RB1 despite a non ideal role, but that's because he's Nick Freakin' Chubb, probably the best pure rusher in Football. To be an RB1 in a split role without receiving work, you have to either be a Nick Chubb level talent, or be on a crazy good offense and get a bunch of goal line work.
Jacobs is not either of those things. He has only been good for fantasy due to volume to date. He's the anti-Nick Chubb.

I would counter that the Browns had probably the best O Line in football last year and the Raiders were probably in the mid 20's as a quality run blocking line.

The Raiders have basically blown up their line to get better this year. We will find out soon enough if they have improved but O lines matter to all RB's at this level.

Jacobs has much better talent IMO than you are suggesting.