Is the Henry deal enough for Mixon?

[WhodeyRay]

(07-16-2020, 12:40 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: To each their own, but in my mind this is easily explainable.  It's not that you "don't pay" them, it's that you don't overpay them.  Running backs are probably the easiest position to replace.  They also have the shortest life-span career wise, making long-term investments all the more risky.  When you combine those two things it drives their price way down.

If you look at some of the very best backs in the game you'll find a disproportinate number of them were taken well outside the 1st round:

Dalvin Cook - 3rd
Alvin Kamara - 3rd
Chris Carson - 7th
Nick Chubb -2nd
Aaron Jones - 5th
Joe Mixon - 2nd
James Connor - 3rd

The fact is, talent at that position, maybe more than any other, can be found later in the draft.  They also tend to be able to produce more quickly than other positions.  Most of the guys listed above were already well above average by year 2.  So there's a quick turnaround time to consider too.

You can look back through the years of great running backs who left their orginal teams only to be replaced by unknowns without a significant loss in production.  Priest Holmes comes to mind as a perfect example of this. 

There's nothing wrong with paying a running back but you really want to be mindful of the cap considerations.  A great running back behind a bad OL is no longer a great back.  An average running back behind a great OL is usually a very good running back.  If you are going to pay out elite money to back you better be damn well sure he's worth it.

Agree Wes. You can not break the bank on a RB. They are already paying the back up starter money. Unless your offense is based around the running game it just doesnt make sense. Give a fair offer and if someone wants to pay big money for his services then best of luck.