What's more important?

[jason]

RB or TE?

 

OK, so it's pretty obvious TE is more important, but the class isn't that great. A lot of people believe TE's are being overvalued because there just aren't good ones. So, figure the round and then go one round later.

 

The RB class, however, has some interesting talent.

 

So, that leads me to this dilemma:

 

What if Derrick Henry and Hunter Henry are both available in the beginning of the third?

 

I like both guys, but I think Derrick Henry could be one of those Earl Campbell types, a guy who is going to easily average 4 yards per carry. He won't cause a ton of missed tackles, but when he gets a head of steam going, he's going to punish LBs and secondary. And if a strong, run-blocking line is in front of him (i.e. Long and Massie), he could bust huge runs. Not only that, he's a guaranteed GL back, something the Bears don't have right now.

 

Hunter Henry? He seems pretty good, but is he going to be better than one of the other guys in the 5th-6th round?

[dawhizz]

I don't want either Henry in the 2nd.

[Stinger226]

RB or TE?

 

OK, so it's pretty obvious TE is more important, but the class isn't that great. A lot of people believe TE's are being overvalued because there just aren't good ones. So, figure the round and then go one round later.

 

The RB class, however, has some interesting talent.

 

So, that leads me to this dilemma:

 

What if Derrick Henry and Hunter Henry are both available in the beginning of the third?

 

I like both guys, but I think Derrick Henry could be one of those Earl Campbell types, a guy who is going to easily average 4 yards per carry. He won't cause a ton of missed tackles, but when he gets a head of steam going, he's going to punish LBs and secondary. And if a strong, run-blocking line is in front of him (i.e. Long and Massie), he could bust huge runs. Not only that, he's a guaranteed GL back, something the Bears don't have right now.

 

Hunter Henry? He seems pretty good, but is he going to be better than one of the other guys in the 5th-6th round?

I would take either but in what round is the key. I think they both go in the 2nd round, and I would not like either at that point. I have read some bad press on Henry but think he will be a good NFL player.

If they were both there in the 3rd, I would probably take Henry because we have Langford and think he could be a really good player. I think there is more depth at the RB position that could be go in later rounds.

[killakrzydav]

I can get behind Henry in the third given the way our coaching staff wants to play.

[killakrzydav]

Derrick that is. If we want the other Henry I believe we have to take him at our second pick. I've seen him in the first round in av few different drafts with Pitt and Indy taking him. Also when I think about it, a Dallas might snag him before we could in the second to replace Witten.

 

That being said, I would be behind both Henry's being our second and third picks.

[scs787]

Considering Zach Miller is turning 32 and is made if glass. Gimme Hunter. He is an all around TE much like Marty B was.

[AZ54]

RB or TE?

 

OK, so it's pretty obvious TE is more important, but the class isn't that great. A lot of people believe TE's are being overvalued because there just aren't good ones. So, figure the round and then go one round later.

 

The RB class, however, has some interesting talent.

 

So, that leads me to this dilemma:

 

What if Derrick Henry and Hunter Henry are both available in the beginning of the third?

 

I like both guys, but I think Derrick Henry could be one of those Earl Campbell types, a guy who is going to easily average 4 yards per carry. He won't cause a ton of missed tackles, but when he gets a head of steam going, he's going to punish LBs and secondary. And if a strong, run-blocking line is in front of him (i.e. Long and Massie), he could bust huge runs. Not only that, he's a guaranteed GL back, something the Bears don't have right now.

 

Hunter Henry? He seems pretty good, but is he going to be better than one of the other guys in the 5th-6th round?

 

 

I really think RB is more important. Elite players aside, RBs touch the ball far more often and that alone makes them more critical to the success of the offense. They have to block just like TEs, they have to catch passes, plus they have to be able to run the ball. What's the first thing you hear when a team drafts a new QB? Better have a good running game. Nobody says better have a good TE, not that it doesn't help and this is usually the second thing you hear. RB are devalued in the draft simply because of the wear and tear of the position. TE is a close second on the wear and tear front.

 

Based on money thrown at FA (CJ Anderson) and the obvious loss of Bennett, I'd say Fox thinks the same. There are lots of pieces to the puzzle so it's always hard to say one over the other but for sure it does depend on what you a) want to do on offense and have players capable of doing on offense. Get a Tom Brady who can make the quick reads and throw very accurately and you want to spread a defense apart and throw the ball. Most teams don't have a Brady. Unless you have one of the top 5 QBs, maybe top 7, your best bet is to go after a strong running game.

 

I would also say being a RB is the easier job.

 

If I had an elite QB who could take advantage of an elite TE I'd go that route. If I didn't, then I'd go with the elite RB every time.

 

I'm curious so let's see if the NFL agrees with me. Teams typically keep 3 of each on their roster so that is equal weighting. Both positions are near the top in terms of injury rates as far as I know.

 

using: http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/draft/2012/tight-end/

 

Draft 1st RD RB 2nd Rd RB 3rd Rd RB RB Tot 1st Rd TE 2nd Rd TE 3rd Rd TE TE Tot

2015 2 2 4 8 0 1 3 4

2014 0 3 5 8 1 3 3 7

2013 0 5 1 6 1 3 2 6

2012 3 2 2 7 1 2 3 6

2011 1 4 3 8 2 1 3 6

 

5yr total RB drafted in 1st 3 Rds = 37

5yr total TE drafted in 1st 3 Rds = 29

 

Based on this admittedly very small sample size, in 80% of drafts more RB will be taken in the first 3 rounds than TEs.