Running backs are likely to fall in the 2023 NFL draft for two reasons. First, this is a not an especially strong year for the top backs, with only one sure first-round prospect. Second, it is 2023, and by now coaches, pre-draft analysts, scouts and all NFL fans who are not living under the largest of boulders have recognized that running backs have traditionally been overrated, and that teams are wise to pick them in later rounds and save high picks for the true premium positions.
This year’s BackCAST projections suggest bargain-bin shopping for running backs might be an even better strategy than it usually is. There is no generational prospect in this draft, and after Texas’ Bijan Robinson, there is little separating the next tier of runners from one another. Put simply, why would a team use a first-, second- or even third-round pick on a prospect who is just as likely to succeed as a prospect available in the fourth or fifth round?
Here is how our Football Outsiders projections work. BackCAST projects NFL success based on statistics that have correlated with success in the past. Historically, a college running back who has a good size-speed combination, has a high average yards per carry and represented a large percentage of his college team’s running attack is more likely to succeed at the NFL level. BackCAST considers these factors and projects the degree to which the running back will exceed the NFL production of an “average” drafted running back during his first five years in the NFL.
For example, a running back with a plus-50% BackCAST is projected to gain 50% more yards than the “average” drafted running back. BackCAST also projects whether each running back is likely to be heavily involved in the receiving game or is more of a “ground-and-pound” back.
What follows is a ranking of the top five BackCAST projections for running back prospects available in the 2023 draft, along with a pick for an overrated player in this class:
TOP FIVE BACKS
BackCAST score: plus-121.8%
Type of back: Receiving
Similar historical prospects: Travis Etienne Jr., Reggie Bush
BackCAST and conventional wisdom agree: Robinson is the best running back prospect in this class.
Robinson ran a 4.46-second 40-yard dash at 215 pounds. It is a very good size-speed combination — much, much better than the average prospect. Robinson also had an increasingly heavy workload, handling 23%, 43% and 60% of the Longhorn’s rushing attempts in his three-year college career. Robinson averaged 6.33 yards per carry, which is again very good.
Accordingly, Robinson has a well-rounded and solid projection. However, he is not a Saquon Barkley– or Jonathan Taylor-level prospect. As a pure runner, Robinson’s numbers are solid but he does not excel in any particular metric. His size-speed ratio is good, but not quite as good as the top running back prospects in the past few drafts. His workload was good, but again, not particularly notable in the context of past top prospects. His yards per carry average is also good, but it is not even the highest in this class.
His numbers do suggest that Robinson could excel as a receiver. Robinson finished his three-year college career with 60 catches for 805 yards and 8 receiving touchdowns. Accordingly, he could be particularly attractive for a pass-happy team looking for a three-down back.
As the value of running backs has dropped in recent years, it is a real question about how much draft capital a player like Robinson is worth. A pick in the top 10 might be too rich for a player like Robinson, but if a team could somehow grab him near the end of the first round, it might end up very happy.
1:54
Bijan Robinson is ‘built different,’ and these plays show it
Check out some of RB Bijan Robinson’s most exciting plays from his career as a Texas Longhorn.
BackCAST score: plus-60.0%
Type of back: Ground-and-pound
Similar historical prospects: Alfred Morris, Laurence Maroney
There is a huge gap between Robinson and BackCAST’s second-best prospect. That said, even accounting for that gap, McBride could prove to be a steal. ESPN’s Todd McShay and Scouts Inc. rank McBride as the fifth-best running back and only the 108th prospect overall, which would place him firmly in the fourth round.
McBride has above-average size and an above-average workload, but the metric that drives his higher-than-expected projection is his yards per carry. McBride averaged 7.3 yards per carry, which is better than any of the running backs invited to the combine this year or last. At first blush, 7.3 yards per carry in Conference USA seems less impressive than 7.3 yards per carry in the SEC.
However, adjusting for strength of schedule has not been helpful in making the metric more predictive. That’s not the same thing as saying that yards per carry is a reliable predictor, as there are many examples of running backs with good yards per carry busting and running backs with bad yards per carry booming. It has just been difficult to pick out which backs have a strong yards per carry because of talent, and which backs have inflated numbers because of favorable circumstances.
Another knock against McBride is that he offers little-to-nothing in the passing game, recording only five receptions in 31 games. Thus, McBride will likely be relegated to, at best, a two-down role. However, the price for McBride could be so low that a smart team might be very content if McBride can excel in that limited role.
BackCAST score: plus-59.5%
Type of back: Receiving
Similar historical prospects: Alvin Kamara, DeMarco Murray
Gibbs is widely acknowledged as the second-best running back prospect in this draft, boasting a lightning fast 4.36-second 40-yard dash at 199 pounds. However, BackCAST is slightly more bearish than the conventional wisdom him, placing him squarely between two players slated to go in the fourth and fifth rounds, respectively.
Why the mediocre projection? BackCAST is skeptical of Gibbs’ college production. We expect top running back prospects to dominate their backfields, and Gibbs’ share of his teams’ carries is only very slightly above the average drafted running back. At Georgia Tech, Gibbs ceded carries to fellow runners Jordan Mason and Dontae Smith, and at Alabama, he split duties with Jase McClellan. Gibbs’ career yards per attempt was also just so-so, but it is worth noting that his yards per attempt improved significantly after he transferred to Alabama.
Gibbs does have very good potential as a receiver. Approximately one-third of Gibbs’ production was in the passing game, and of all the running back prospects in this year’s draft, BackCAST rates Gibbs as the most likely to have his production skew more heavily towards receiving yards than rushing yards.
Gibbs certainly has more than enough going for him to live up to his relatively high draft position (he is currently rated 24th overall by Scouts Inc.). However, a team should be confident in his tape before spending the draft capital needed to secure his services, when the alternative would be spending a low first-round pick or high second-round pick on another position and looking toward prospects similar to Gibbs who are likely to be available in later rounds.
BackCAST score: plus-57.0%
Type of back: Receiving
Similar historical prospects: Mewelde Moore, Darren McFadden
From a BackCAST perspective, Tucker is only a hair behind fellow sleeper McBride but may be an even better value, as he is ranked lower than McBride by draftniks. Tucker is rated 148th overall by Scouts Inc., which would place him in the fifth round.
Like McBride, Tucker excels in a single metric — for him, it is his workload. Tucker grabbed Syracuse’s backfield and never let it go. Indeed, BackCAST arguably understates Tucker’s use in the backfield because it does not separate out carries from quarterbacks. Almost all of Syracuse’s carries that were not Tucker’s went to quarterback Garrett Shrader, who recorded 329 carries at Syracuse since transferring from Mississippi State for the 2021 season. Tucker’s yards per attempt is a bit low for a drafted prospect, although the unambiguous vote of confidence that he received from his coaches, who consistently fed him the rock, mitigates some concerns that might be raised about his talent.
Tucker also offers value in the receiving game, as he recorded 64 receptions for 622 yards and four receiving touchdowns.
BackCAST score: plus-53.4%
Type of back: Receiving
Similar historical prospects: Darren Sproles, C.J. Spiller
After McBride and Tucker, BackCAST makes a more conventional pick in Achane. Achane is rated as a late second-round pick, which is fairly consistent with where BackCAST slots him. Achane has very solid, if not spectacular numbers for workload and yards per attempt, and Achane recorded a blazing fast 4.32-second 40-yard dash at the combine. However, he weighed in at only 188 pounds, which is unusually light for a running back prospect. Indeed, there have been approximately a dozen running back prospects 188 pounds or under who were drafted in the last two decades and most were late-round prospects that never made an impact at the NFL level.
In sum, like conventional wisdom, BackCAST recognizes that Achane is an intriguing talent, but that he will have to fight against some history if he wants to succeed at the NFL level.
MOST OVERRATED BACK
BackCAST score: plus-15.1%
Type of back: Balanced
Similar historical prospects: Kevin Faulk, Mark Ingram II
Scouts Inc. rates Charbonnet as its fourth-best running back prospect, but BackCAST rates him as only the 12th-best back. While Charbonnet’s projection is not terrible — after all, he still projects slightly better than the average drafted running back — he might nevertheless be this year’s most overrated running back prospect.
BackCAST mostly dislikes Charbonnet because of his relatively low share of his teams’ carries. Charbonnet started strong at Michigan as a freshman, but was out-carried by Hassan Haskins during Michigan’s COVID-shortened 2020 season. Even after he transferred to UCLA, he did not dominate his backfield, recording only 38% and 43% of his team’s carries during his two years with the Bruins. Although Charbonnet is a bigger back, his 4.54-second 40-yard dash time is just okay. Charbonnet is likely garnering attention because he had a very strong senior campaign, averaging 7.0 yards per carry. However, Charbonnet was much less productive on a per play basis during his first three years as a collegian, which drags down the metric used for BackCAST.
Despite BackCAST’s lukewarm take on Charbonnet, if his tape is as good as his draft rating indicates, he certainly could end up being a value pick for a team if he ends up slipping far into the later rounds. Although the historical trends are pointing away from success, Charbonnet is actually pretty good for a “most overrated” prospect, and it would not be shocking to see him succeed.