Trend or No?

There has been a recent adage that a team should not draft a running back in the first round of the NFL draft. Some have even intimated that the Chargers wasted their first round pick on Melvin Gordon. With NFL draft pundits such as Mel Kiper, Jr. saying that a team can find a qualified running back in later rounds just as easily, the mantra has caught on and now it seems to be a belief among fans.

Here's the problem with that thinking, this trend of not taking a running back in the first round has only happened twice in recent history, in 2013 and in 2014. That is a mere blip on the screen on the NFL draft as opposed to a trend. So to say that this recent occurrence is an ongoing trend is a misnomer. It could be a trend, and this last draft could be an anomaly in the trend, but to say that this is the prevalent thinking in the NFL based upon two years is irresponsible and incorrect.

Value:

Part of the issue is the term "value" and how it this term has been bandied about by Kiper and other draft pundits in recent years. In fact, when discussing "value," it does not only apply to running backs, it often applies to safeties and guards, because those positions were traditionally chosen later in the draft; therefore, those players in those positions have less "value" than other "premium" positions.

The problem with the idea of "value" and how it's applied is multifold. First, most of us fans get our idea of where draft prospects seemingly line up and are ranked based off of where these same draft pundits who preach about value place them, such as Kiper's Big Board or how Daniel Jeremiah or Mike Mayock rank them for NFL.com. Here's where the conundrum is. Basing one's opinion based upon where Kiper or Mayock may rank these players and how they value the player is disingenuous and problematic. Problematic because we as fans base our opinions upon these lists and don't actually know what the Chargers' (or other teams) board looks like. For all we know, Kiper's Big Board is a complete farce and nowhere near to what the Chargers' board look like. So, to base one's opinion off of a pundit's view of things, especially since he's the one speaking of "value" in the draft, is myopic.

The Life of a Running Back:

Also, some people have wondered about the life of the running back taken in the first round and how long they will last in the NFL, specifically if they will make it to their second contract. This is paradoxically short sighted. The Chargers currently control Gordon for four years, with an option for a fifth year. Beyond that is impossible to see and to speculate and it's asinine to try to forecast that far into the future, in any position, because of the complete uncertainty of it. This ambiguity is independent of position, even though there is some validity to the anxiety that running backs have a tendency to wear down faster relatively, to pan a pick based upon this potential possibility is odd way to look at things. While it is important for a GM (or even us fans) to look to the future of the franchise, trying to gauge the future of the franchise seven, eight, nine, or ten years down the road is inane due to unpredictability of the NFL at large.

The Theory in Practice:

An example of how this argument of "value" doesn't necessarily apply can be seen in the last running back that the Chargers took: Ryan Mathews. Yes, Ryan Mathews didn't pan out as the player that the Chargers, or we as fans, had hoped, but the players picked after him in the draft had careers less impressive than Mathews (save maybe one). C.J. Spiller (taken before Mathews and has had 3,321 yards in his career), Jahvid Best (retired), Dexter McCluster (more of a KR/WR), Toby Gerhart (1,631 yards in his career), Ben Tate (2,363 yards in his career), Montario Hardesty (537 yards in his career), Joe McKnight (505 yards in his career), Anthony Dixon (890 yards yards in his career), Deji Karim (341 yards in his career), Jonathan Dwyer (1,022 yards in his career), James Stark (1,761 yards in his career), Trindon Holliday (more of a KR), Charles Scott (not in the league), and Jameson Konz (a TE that played in one game) were all drafted after Mathews in 2010.

None of those players has had the career of the oft-injured Mathews has had (4,061 yards and 24 TDs). In fact, the only running back from the 2010 that has a career of some semblance of success (along with Mathews) is LeGarrette Blount (3,258 yards and 25 TDs), a player that has bounced around the league due to character concerns (why he wasn't drafted) and can only seemingly play for Bill Belichick since he can't seem to stick anywhere else. All of the clamouring for the Chargers to wait and not pick a back in the first round of the 2010 draft wouldn't have panned out as the fans would've liked; therefore, the "value" wouldn't have been there in the later rounds for a running back of the 2010 draft. While admittedly, this a narrow scope of the larger issue, it illustrates that this theory is not absolute and was flawed in at least the 2010 draft. ,3,258258

How This Applies to Gordon:

The Gordon picked was mixed, at best. The pick was panned by some fans, accepted by others, and celebrated by the rest. Seemingly, Gordon was the player that the Chargers identified as the one with the most value for them and was at the top of their board when pick 15 rolled around since they deemed him important enough to trade for and select with the aforementioned selection. Will he be a good fit for the Chargers? We don't know as of yet, but we do know that he was ranked by the draft pundits as a first round talent. So, while it is indeed early to dismiss Gordon as a wasted pick, we won't know how successful he will be until the regular season.