Maybe. I think that this regime has a pretty strong set of beliefs about value, and rarely wavers from that.
Each year, we hear rumours that this or that player was on our board, but was selected before we were comfortable making the pick.
This year, I think they'll take Gibbs if he's there @2, or Charbonnet @3, or even @2 if they're sold on him. There are others that they might take a look at farther down.
I want to bring up Edmonds. Yes, he was a failure, but I think that what most thought he would be... shows what we are really looking for. The book on Edmonds was that he was as much of a receiver as a running back, and that he ran with some power, but was not solely a power-back... then he got here and just couldn't figure out which hole to hit... wasn't a sure-handed as he had been previously... and just stunk it up so badly we were forced to move him.
A FA that bombed on his new team, it happens, but his style of play is what I want to focus on. McCaffrey is the same sort of back, and it's telling that SF spent some serious capital upon him. I think a zone-blocking scheme needs a quick RB with hands... but not so light as he wont be able to pick up 3rd and 1.
Again... I think there are 3 or 4 other RBs that we might look at on day 3, as well as a few like McBride whose stone hands make him unlikely, or Achane who is too small to be more than a complementary piece.
If we can find a 1A type of back on the third day, then we'll pay almost nothing against the cap for 4-5 years of play... so I still think that we'll weigh that against reaching on day 2.
RBs fall a lot farther than some people think. Over the last 2 years, only a total of 10 RBs were taken on the first 2 days of the draft.
Yes... it varies from year to year, and Yes, some of this is based on the quality of the crop, but the numbers are also affected by the low value of the position.
Could we select a guy in the third round or below and still get a starter? Very possibly.