Opinion: Travis Etienne is the best RB prospect since Barkley

[cantguardjake]

To be fair over half of them had round 4+ draft capital and even Caff was a fairly polarising prospect at the time.

It’s an unbelievable class in hindsight.

Personally not seeing a huge amount of depth this year though.

[MEuRaH]

Merely 4 years ago Christian McCaffery, Alvin Kamara, Dalvin Cook, Aaron Jones, Joe Mixon, Kareem Hunt, Leonard Fournette, Chris Carson, Austin Ekeler, James Conner, Tarik Cohen, Marlon Mack and Matt Breida, among others, were in the same class.

There’s a reasonable discussion to be had re: 2021’s RB group and whether or not they’re being properly valued but “the best draft class I’ve ever seen” is an inane position to take. File this with all the others.

This is the best draft class I've ever seen in terms of depth. It's not the best top talent, but it's definitely the deepest. Your definition of "best" is different than my definition.

Not a ton of top talent, but tons of depth.

[zeeshan2]

Breer is saying the same thing:

NBC Sports' Peter King said the Bills could draft Clemson's Travis Etienne with the 30th pick in the NFL Draft.
King said Etienne would be a "great puzzle piece in an offense that craves speed in the backfield." King argued that Buffalo's offense "in top-off mode," seeking a productive running back to fit the team's wildly productive offense.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... t=Edge1248

[MEuRaH]

Breer is saying the same thing:

NBC Sports' Peter King said the Bills could draft Clemson's Travis Etienne with the 30th pick in the NFL Draft.
King said Etienne would be a "great puzzle piece in an offense that craves speed in the backfield." King argued that Buffalo's offense "in top-off mode," seeking a productive running back to fit the team's wildly productive offense.

https://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2 ... t=Edge1248

I know a lot of people who think Etienne in Buffalo would be a bad fit, but LeSean McCoy was great there, and ETN would be similar. The offense in Buffalo has evolved and a defense that's focusing more on stopping the passing game would give someone like ETN an edge. Mobile quarterbacks have historically been great for RBs.

I love this kid so much. I just hope he doesn't go to the Jets or something.

[Ice]

Etienne has a style that he won't be a bad fit anywhere. I get Fantasy location may not be great in some spots early but given how teams change I wouldn't worry.

In fact the Jet's example may be a great fit given they will be transforming to a 49er base offensive system more than likely and that would be really good for Etienne IMO.

The only minor knock I see is he does get his pads too high sometimes but think he is so explosive he will be really good at the NFL level as more teams run spread RPO systems. I think he is the #1 RB in this class by a fair margin in a pretty deep class.

[OhCruelestRanter]

Merely 4 years ago Christian McCaffery, Alvin Kamara, Dalvin Cook, Aaron Jones, Joe Mixon, Kareem Hunt, Leonard Fournette, Chris Carson, Austin Ekeler, James Conner, Tarik Cohen, Marlon Mack and Matt Breida, among others, were in the same class.

There’s a reasonable discussion to be had re: 2021’s RB group and whether or not they’re being properly valued but “the best draft class I’ve ever seen” is an inane position to take. File this with all the others.

This is the best draft class I've ever seen in terms of depth. It's not the best top talent, but it's definitely the deepest. Your definition of "best" is different than my definition.

Not a ton of top talent, but tons of depth.

I just listed 13 running backs who were fantasy relevant. You think this class is better than that class because... they’ll have more than that? How many more? If the RB14 in this class is better than the RB14 in 2017, that will make it better? That 2017 class has produced a staggering 21 of the total 48 RB1 seasons over the last 4 years.

You didn’t say “deepest” class, you said “best.” There isn’t a single person here who thinks those words are synonymous.

This is the best draft class I've ever seen.

It’s an awful, poorly thought out take, like many that came before it. And now, unfortunately, I suspect you’re going to violently defend this class as the best class you’ve ever seen in perpetuity, insisting “well I don’t think I was technically wrong, the RB17 in that class was a little better than Elijah McGuire, which is how I define best.”

You really can just say “Oops, I guess I really meant deepest” and everybody would move on. You don’t have to dig in like this every time. I promise.

[MEuRaH]

If I'm an NFL team, this is a dream draft because I can wait until the third day or even sign undrafted free agents to shore up the position. Most teams utilize RBBC these days, and this draft is incredible for that purpose. It's the best draft class in recent memory for this reason. I will be fully invested in this draft from rounds one to seven as far as RB placement is concerned. I can't remember another time ever that my interest in RBs lasted beyond the fourth round.

I've explained my point of view plenty on this.
Your point of view is different.
We're done here.

[Bronco Billy]

I have to agree that I’m just not seeing it in this class. The allegedly best RB in the class is wholely dependent upon landing in an offense where they will create situations to get him the ball in space because he does not look capable of any kind of interior running game or being able to create for himself to get to the second level.

To say that we’ve got a RB class loaded with guys who are going to get 6-12 touches a game and the strategy is to hope that the guys(s) you picked will bust off a couple of long plays in those limited touches so that they are what - going to put up RB2 numbers some of the time? That doesn’t look particularly appetizing to me.

[MEuRaH]

I have to agree that I’m just not seeing it in this class. The allegedly best RB in the class is wholely dependent upon landing in an offense where they will create situations to get him the ball in space because he does not look capable of any kind of interior running game or being able to create for himself to get to the second level.

To say that we’ve got a RB class loaded with guys who are going to get 6-12 touches a game and the strategy is to hope that the guys(s) you picked will bust off a couple of long plays in those limited touches so that they are what - going to put up RB2 numbers some of the time? That doesn’t look particularly appetizing to me.

Depends on your league settings. I have RB3s and 6 flex spots in multiple leagues. The deeper the team you can create that can get touches, the better it'll be. Depth last year was an issue.

I guess if you have a team that only requires 1-2 RBs and a couple flex spots, it's a lot less interesting.

[Jigga94]

I have to agree that I’m just not seeing it in this class. The allegedly best RB in the class is wholely dependent upon landing in an offense where they will create situations to get him the ball in space because he does not look capable of any kind of interior running game or being able to create for himself to get to the second level.

To say that we’ve got a RB class loaded with guys who are going to get 6-12 touches a game and the strategy is to hope that the guys(s) you picked will bust off a couple of long plays in those limited touches so that they are what - going to put up RB2 numbers some of the time? That doesn’t look particularly appetizing to me.

Depends on your league settings. I have RB3s and 6 flex spots in multiple leagues. The deeper the team you can create that can get touches, the better it'll be. Depth last year was an issue.

I guess if you have a team that only requires 1-2 RBs and a couple flex spots, it's a lot less interesting.

I was going to ask, but this seems to answer/debunk it... Anyways, is calling it "deep" more new NFL-rbbc related for you? Or do you think it will translate to fantasy? (League always dependant of course)...

There are other classes that will be better than this one, but if it's moreso about the RB being useful in a role, due to more roles available (rbbc), then I get it. I'm not still not sure I care about Day 3 RB too much, but if the NFL is going to devalue the position, than maybe round 5 is the new 3

[MEuRaH]

I was going to ask, but this seems to answer/debunk it... Anyways, is calling it "deep" more new NFL-rbbc related for you? Or do you think it will translate to fantasy? (League always dependant of course)...

There are other classes that will be better than this one, but if it's moreso about the RB being useful in a role, due to more roles available (rbbc), then I get it. I'm not still not sure I care about Day 3 RB too much, but if the NFL is going to devalue the position, than maybe round 5 is the new 3

To me, deep is always draftable players. Last year I thought only 5-6 RBs were draftable. This year it's 24 (as of now). That's insanely deep.

That doesn't mean I have 24 players ranked in my top 48, just that there are 24 RBs as of now that I'm interested in, and would love to see where they land.

[ArrylT]

Honestly I do think a lot will always depend on peoples perspectives.

Personally I do not think Etienne is situation dependant.

Situation differs from opportunity in that, to me, situation is the team & its scheme, while opportunity is your health/development & the players ahead/behind you and their health/development. Many may prefer to encapsulate that into 1 but I prefer, because as we (should) know talent in one role/scheme does not mean talent in another role/scheme, am working to keep them separated in my perspective.

He might be opportunity dependant, but his projected draft range makes it unlikely that he'll end up with a bad opportunity - ie I do not see him going to a team with a proven 3 down bellcow like Cook/Elliott/CMC - and he'll need to show he isnt "learning" or has "attitude" to lose that opportunity ...

Even Waldman, who does not have Etienne ranked in his top 3, says that Etienne is a more scheme diverse talent than people may wish to acknowledge. I think the Kamara comparison was apt because I honestly would not be surprised if Etienne lands in a situation that many deem murky - like Kamara did. Then lets say for whatever reason Etiennes flaws pop up and that delays his progression. People will then say "see I told you" ... but if he works on his craft, and gets the role expected, then he'll do pretty much like Kamara did. And if he does land in a great situation with a rock solid opportunity and flashes early - well look out ...

[cantguardjake]

The top 3 are all solid prospects, if Hill and Sermon can land day 2 capital it’s a lot more interesting - I think they’re rb 4 and 5 quite comfortably.

Not seeing a whole lot more after that, everyone has red flags.

Chris Evans, Jake Funk and Nathan McCrary are all elite athletes and actually look pretty decent but have terrible analytical profiles and production and probably go late to undrafted, not really worth a roster spot.

Carter, Gainwell, Pooka and Hawkins are all undersized and have a low end rb2 ceiling at best.

Stevenson has half a year of production and is a sub athlete, could be worth a flier with round 4 capital.

Jefferson is undersized and a terrible athlete, a career 3 on the depth chart type.

Khalil Herbert is 30 in running back years lol

I see a bit of love for Mitchell and Ragas around but they’re as JAGy to me as Larry Roundtree (despite Mitchell’s 40 time).

Throw Chuba and Patterson in the 2 down JAG category as well.

[OhCruelestRanter]

Merely 4 years ago Christian McCaffery, Alvin Kamara, Dalvin Cook, Aaron Jones, Joe Mixon, Kareem Hunt, Leonard Fournette, Chris Carson, Austin Ekeler, James Conner, Tarik Cohen, Marlon Mack and Matt Breida, among others, were in the same class.

There’s a reasonable discussion to be had re: 2021’s RB group and whether or not they’re being properly valued but “the best draft class I’ve ever seen” is an inane position to take. File this with all the others.

This is the best draft class I've ever seen in terms of depth. It's not the best top talent, but it's definitely the deepest. Your definition of "best" is different than my definition.

Not a ton of top talent, but tons of depth.

I just listed 13 running backs who were fantasy relevant. You think this class is better than that class because... they’ll have more than that? How many more? If the RB14 in this class is better than the RB14 in 2017, that will make it better? That 2017 class has produced a staggering 21 of the total 48 RB1 seasons over the last 4 years.

You didn’t say “deepest” class, you said “best.” There isn’t a single person here who thinks those words are synonymous.

This is the best draft class I've ever seen.

It’s an awful, poorly thought out take, like many that came before it. And now, unfortunately, I suspect you’re going to violently defend this class as the best class you’ve ever seen in perpetuity, insisting “well I don’t think I was technically wrong, the RB17 in that class was a little better than Elijah McGuire, which is how I define best.”

You really can just say “Oops, I guess I really meant deepest” and everybody would move on. You don’t have to dig in like this every time. I promise.

Well Mike threatened to ban me over this.

[Ice]

Arguing over a single word or an opinion is pretty sad and not useful. In the future disagreeing and moving on is the better move than attacking one that is doing massive research for the benefit of the community. That may not have been the intent but it reads that way.

I read no place that he demanded we agree with his assessment that this is the best or deepest class.

There is a lot of talent in this class. Will many or any be legit long term stars; That is an unknown until well into the future.