Post Draft Risers/Fallers (Non Rookies) (1 Viewer)

[massraider]

So, Thomas Rawls did not have a great day.

 

[identikit]

So, Thomas Rawls did not have a great day.

If his ankle's fine, then he's fine

 

[Tau837]

So, Thomas Rawls did not have a great day.

I don't see that at all. Ignoring Lynch, the Seahawks only had two RBs under contract and expected to make the team before the draft, so it was a given that they would draft at least two, especially given all the picks they had. These guys all seem to have clear roles:

• Prosise should be the third down back.
  
• Collins should be the 4th RB. He is like a poor man's Rawls, so he is a good depth player in the event Rawls gets injured, but otherwise unlikely to be active on game days.
  
• I don't think Brooks will make the team, but, if he does, I doubt he will do any more than play special teams.
  

If healthy, Rawls should be the starter, and Michael should be the backup, with Prosise available for third down duty, assuming he can pass protect sufficiently.

Also, the team added three OL, and that is good for Rawls (and all of the offense).

 

[massraider]

I don't see that at all. Ignoring Lynch, the Seahawks only had two RBs under contract and expected to make the team before the draft, so it was a given that they would draft at least two, especially given all the picks they had. These guys all seem to have clear roles:

• Prosise should be the third down back.
  
• Collins should be the 4th RB. He is like a poor man's Rawls, so he is a good depth player in the event Rawls gets injured, but otherwise unlikely to be active on game days.
  
• I don't think Brooks will make the team, but, if he does, I doubt he will do any more than play special teams.
  

If healthy, Rawls should be the starter, and Michael should be the backup, with Prosise available for third down duty, assuming he can pass protect sufficiently.

Also, the team added three OL, and that is good for Rawls (and all of the offense).

I think Michael, Prosise, and Collins are all very, very interesting talents.  That is a general statement, I know, but I don't say that about a lot of teams.  

The Rawls train is chugging right along.  I am not buying a ticket.

 

[Alex P Keaton]

I don't see that at all. Ignoring Lynch, the Seahawks only had two RBs under contract and expected to make the team before the draft, so it was a given that they would draft at least two, especially given all the picks they had. These guys all seem to have clear roles:

• Prosise should be the third down back.
  
• Collins should be the 4th RB. He is like a poor man's Rawls, so he is a good depth player in the event Rawls gets injured, but otherwise unlikely to be active on game days.
  
• I don't think Brooks will make the team, but, if he does, I doubt he will do any more than play special teams.
  

If healthy, Rawls should be the starter, and Michael should be the backup, with Prosise available for third down duty, assuming he can pass protect sufficiently.

Also, the team added three OL, and that is good for Rawls (and all of the offense).

Wasn't Rawls undrafted?  Maybe Rawls is a poor man's Collins.

 

[Ilov80s]

I don't see that at all. Ignoring Lynch, the Seahawks only had two RBs under contract and expected to make the team before the draft, so it was a given that they would draft at least two, especially given all the picks they had. These guys all seem to have clear roles:

• Prosise should be the third down back.
  
• Collins should be the 4th RB. He is like a poor man's Rawls, so he is a good depth player in the event Rawls gets injured, but otherwise unlikely to be active on game days.
  
• I don't think Brooks will make the team, but, if he does, I doubt he will do any more than play special teams.
  

If healthy, Rawls should be the starter, and Michael should be the backup, with Prosise available for third down duty, assuming he can pass protect sufficiently.

Also, the team added three OL, and that is good for Rawls (and all of the offense).

Why is Prosise confined to a 3rd down role?  I am not saying he will beat out Rawls, but I don't think he is limited either. 

 

[Golfjim]

What about Hartline of the Browns?  As a #3 or #4 WR, he did pretty well.  I thing Cleveland drafted 4 WRs.  Does that mean all of the Browns 2015 WRs are history?

 

[Tau837]

Wasn't Rawls undrafted?  Maybe Rawls is a poor man's Collins.

I watched every Seahawks game last season, and I believe my eyes on Rawls.  

 

[Tau837]

Why is Prosise confined to a 3rd down role?  I am not saying he will beat out Rawls, but I don't think he is limited either. 

Maybe he isn't, but he has only played one season (actually not even a full season) as a full-time RB, and he is a former WR who caught the ball extremely well out of the backfield in that one season.

It is well known that his pass protection skills are poor. So that may limit him on all downs. He also fumbled 5 times in 182 touches last season, so ball security is an issue.

Taken altogether, it seems that his best chance to contribute is as a receiving back on passing downs where he is asked to run routes, not pass protect.

 

[Run It Up]

Dion Lewis imo, Pats didn't bring in any RB help outside of UDFA DJ Foster who is more of a receiver.

I think Hogan, Martin and Mitchell will be competing for the WR2 spot and Amendola will be the Edelman insurance and WR3.

I think with the Lions not taking a WR Marvin Jones gets a clear bump.

 

[tone1oc]

Maybe he isn't, but he has only played one season (actually not even a full season) as a full-time RB, and he is a former WR who caught the ball extremely well out of the backfield in that one season.

It is well known that his pass protection skills are poor. So that may limit him on all downs. He also fumbled 5 times in 182 touches last season, so ball security is an issue.

Taken altogether, it seems that his best chance to contribute is as a receiving back on passing downs where he is asked to run routes, not pass protect.

Let us not forget that -the- reason it took Christine Michael two years to get a carry was because he couldn't pass protect.  That they drafted 2 RBs isn't good, but I'm glad they spent their 3rd on a guy who does profile as a 3rd down back or at least needs some time.  The biggest issue for me regarding the added depth is if it is a signal that Rawls' injury is worse than we think.

 

[CR69]

Let us not forget that -the- reason it took Christine Michael two years to get a carry was because he couldn't pass protect.  That they drafted 2 RBs isn't good, but I'm glad they spent their 3rd on a guy who does profile as a 3rd down back or at least needs some time.  The biggest issue for me regarding the added depth is if it is a signal that Rawls' injury is worse than we think.

Or maybe Seattle isn't sold on Michael as their backup RB? 

 

[tone1oc]

Or maybe Seattle isn't sold on Michael as their backup RB? 

I was talking about CJP and his lack of pass pro ability.  It was popular belief that CM didn't get any run because of it.  I think it's clear now that CM has other issues.

 

[CR69]

I was talking about CJP and his lack of pass pro ability.  It was popular belief that CM didn't get any run because of it.  I think it's clear now that CM has other issues.

I was responding to this part of your post, forgot to bold it:

"The biggest issue for me regarding the added depth is if it is a signal that Rawls' injury is worse than we think."

 

[tone1oc]

I was responding to this part of your post, forgot to bold it:

"The biggest issue for me regarding the added depth is if it is a signal that Rawls' injury is worse than we think."

Oh whoops... That could be as well, I was only speculating that as a scenario that kind of gives me pause.  I believe in Rawls talent.

 

[CR69]

Oh whoops... That could be as well, I was only speculating that as a scenario that kind of gives me pause.  I believe in Rawls talent.

It could be either, or both. I like Rawls' talent too, the kid runs so hard. 

 

[branch0095]

I don't see that at all. Ignoring Lynch, the Seahawks only had two RBs under contract and expected to make the team before the draft, so it was a given that they would draft at least two, especially given all the picks they had. These guys all seem to have clear roles:

• Prosise should be the third down back.
  
• Collins should be the 4th RB. He is like a poor man's Rawls, so he is a good depth player in the event Rawls gets injured, but otherwise unlikely to be active on game days.
  
• I don't think Brooks will make the team, but, if he does, I doubt he will do any more than play special teams.
  

If healthy, Rawls should be the starter, and Michael should be the backup, with Prosise available for third down duty, assuming he can pass protect sufficiently.

Also, the team added three OL, and that is good for Rawls (and all of the offense).

I agree with most of this, and I think it all hinges on Rawls' health. I will say that Rawls being an UDFA does worry me a bit more if he's not fully healed and ready to compete by OTAs. With the team having little to no investment in Rawls, it could be very difficult for him to take back a starting role if he falls behind during OTA or is unable to go by the start of the season.

Drafting these RBs in general does put some heat of Rawls, but what really did people expect to happen? SEA had Rawls (coming off injury) and re-signed Michael for 1 year (A player they traded away last season). It was obvious that SEA had to address the position. I still believe Rawls is the best RB on the Seahawks roster, but this may be a wake up call for those that believed Rawls was going to be an unquestioned 3-down workhorse. 

In the end, I think Rawls' health will dictate how the depth chart shakes out. If he's healthy and ready to go, I think he gets the majority of the early down and GL work with Procise working as a COP/3rd-down back. If he's not healthy, all bets are off and we may have seen Rawls' opportunity slip away.

 

[menobrown]

I assume they would save a lot more money by letting McFadden go. Plus, Dunbar has a unique skill set that could the team could still use. I know Elliot is a good receiver, but he's not Dunbar level good.

No, DMC is only due $1.25 million, they are not going to cut him and Dunbar may not even be active.

 

[steelers1080]

Pitt's D is a riser as well.

I'd wait on that.  I'd be surprised if the defenders they got can step in week 1 and help the team.  Their top 3 picks are NFL projects, not players who should be able to jump in right away.

That said, I think that if some or all of them work out, they could have an awesome defense next year.  They added 2 playmakers in the secondary, 2 rushers who can get to the QB a lot (interior and outer), and an ILB who just makes stops.

 

[steelers1080]

I watched every Seahawks game last season, and I believe my eyes on Rawls.  

Could be a sign that they're worried about the injury?  They've been really vague on his return schedule.  Not sure why they'd see it as a long term issue though.

Also, it could just be that they want to run the ball A TON and figure that having 3-4 talented RBs is better than having 1 who got injured last year.  If they run the ball 30+ times a game, it wouldn't be surprising if Rawls got 18, Collins got 8, Prosise got 4 and Prosise caught 4-8 out of the backfield.  They're going to need a committee to try and replace Lynch's production just because he was so consistent.

 

[Tau837]

Could be a sign that they're worried about the injury?  They've been really vague on his return schedule.  Not sure why they'd see it as a long term issue though.

Also, it could just be that they want to run the ball A TON and figure that having 3-4 talented RBs is better than having 1 who got injured last year.  If they run the ball 30+ times a game, it wouldn't be surprising if Rawls got 18, Collins got 8, Prosise got 4 and Prosise caught 4-8 out of the backfield.  They're going to need a committee to try and replace Lynch's production just because he was so consistent.

They are not going to have RBs carry the ball 30 times per game and catch up to 8 passes per game. Since Carroll arrived, here are the number of RB carries per season:

• 2011 - 387
  
• 2012 - 429 (Wilson's rookie season)
  
• 2013 - 399
  
• 2014 - 388
  
• 2015 - 382
  

So they have typically been at an average of fewer than 25 RB carries per game, and trending downward. They also have not had a RB yet who caught more than 48 passes in a season (3 per game).

 

[steelers1080]

They are not going to have RBs carry the ball 30 times per game and catch up to 8 passes per game. Since Carroll arrived, here are the number of RB carries per season:

• 2011 - 387
  
• 2012 - 429 (Wilson's rookie season)
  
• 2013 - 399
  
• 2014 - 388
  
• 2015 - 382
  

So they have typically been at an average of fewer than 25 RB carries per game, and trending downward. They also have not had a RB yet who caught more than 48 passes in a season (3 per game).

Meh, that's the past.  They had 1 RB to carry the load (Turbin and Michael don't count) and now they might have 3 quality RBs.  Why not put them to work?  Teams with great defenses usually win on time of possession, even if SEA showed a passing attack last year.  Also, teams have never really seen a potent passing attack from Seattle before.  That could be part of why it succeeded last year, and it might not be as impressive this year.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Meh, that's the past.  They had 1 RB to carry the load (Turbin and Michael don't count) and now they might have 3 quality RBs.  Why not put them to work?  Teams with great defenses usually win on time of possession, even if SEA showed a passing attack last year.  Also, teams have never really seen a potent passing attack from Seattle before.  That could be part of why it succeeded last year, and it might not be as impressive this year.

So 2nd and 4th round picks "don't count", but the 3rd and 5th round backs they just brought in are immediately "quality backs"? 

Surely you see your recency bias here. We're probably not even at a point where we can call Rawls a sure fire "quality back" yet. 

 

[biju]

With regard to Graham, I think Vannett is a guy that can come in right away and contribute to the run game, I like his chances of getting snaps right away (albiet devoid of fantasy utility) and it signals to me a re focus of the role of the TE in that offense.   

While I'm not going say Graham will come back healthy as before since nobody knows this and the history of the injury doesn't necessarily bode well, I don't think a 3rd round pick on Vannett is a signal to his health.  The Seahawks have always coveted the "all around" TE (Zach Miller) and certainly have a need for someone who is more of a blocking back.  Add in that Luke Willson is in the final year of his rookie deal and that TEs take longer to learn the position and it makes sense to invest in a TE this year.  Plus, with the O-line problems they will see this year I suspect a blocking TE was necessary and Vannett is likely an upgrade to Willson's blocking, just not his pass-catching (nor Graham's).

 

[tone1oc]

While I'm not going say Graham will come back healthy as before since nobody knows this and the history of the injury doesn't necessarily bode well, I don't think a 3rd round pick on Vannett is a signal to his health.  The Seahawks have always coveted the "all around" TE (Zach Miller) and certainly have a need for someone who is more of a blocking back.  Add in that Luke Willson is in the final year of his rookie deal and that TEs take longer to learn the position and it makes sense to invest in a TE this year.  Plus, with the O-line problems they will see this year I suspect a blocking TE was necessary and Vannett is likely an upgrade to Willson's blocking, just not his pass-catching (nor Graham's).

Graham will likely start out on PUP, skill players with torn patellar do not have a very good prognosis for returning to health (see: Victor Cruz) and I think it's extremely optimistic to think he'll be ready Week 1.  The rest of what you said I agree with.

 

[steelers1080]

So 2nd and 4th round picks "don't count", but the 3rd and 5th round backs they just brought in are immediately "quality backs"? 

Surely you see your recency bias here. We're probably not even at a point where we can call Rawls a sure fire "quality back" yet. 

It's not because of the round they were chosen, moreso because they never showed themselves to be talented NFL running backs.  My main point was that Rawls wouldn't be getting close to 100% of the carries like he did since there will be competition.  It's not a given that Collins or Prosise will turn out, but I think they have the talent to push for carries.

Also, the value of RBs has changed over the last few years, 2nd and 4th a couple years ago could easily be 4th and 6th this year.

 

[Hankmoody]

No Osweiler love?  They drafted two different WR's and a COP RB that can rack up yardage in a hurry.  I'm not even very high on Fuller but the investments have to mean good things for Brock.

 

[lod01]

I was talking about CJP and his lack of pass pro ability.  It was popular belief that CM didn't get any run because of it.  I think it's clear now that CM has other issues.

You can't even teach pass protection with Wilson at QB because you don't have a clue where he is. You can step in on a blitz pickup but that's it and if he senses a blitz himself he won't be in the pocket for long anyway.

 

[ChuckLiddell]

Ryan Mathews was mentioned once, but IMO he should be getting more press in this thread.  Eagles had a shot at their choice of RBs after EE and Henry with their 3rd round pick, and took a center instead.  Double win for Mathews.  Waited until the 5th to take Brandon Smallwood, who does not appear to pose a major threat.  Looks like its Mathews' backfield barring the unforeseen.  

 

[Shutout]

Ryan Mathews was mentioned once, but IMO he should be getting more press in this thread.  Eagles had a shot at their choice of RBs after EE and Henry with their 3rd round pick, and took a center instead.  Double win for Mathews.  Waited until the 5th to take Brandon Smallwood, who does not appear to pose a major threat.  Looks like its Mathews' backfield barring the unforeseen.  

Isn't Sproles still there?  I agree with your post but also think Sproles is one of those more uncommon "change of pace" guys that can steal more thunder than most.

 

[ChuckLiddell]

Isn't Sproles still there?  I agree with your post but also think Sproles is one of those more uncommon "change of pace" guys that can steal more thunder than most.

He is still there, but I dont think he is really much of a threat.  Turns 33 in June, and averaged just 3.8 YPC on 83 total carries last year.  He will come in for some 3rd downs, but it wasnt like Mathews was going to get 100% of the snaps out of the backfield.  Somebody else will get carries.  Sproles is no threat to carry the ball 10+ times per game.  Should be a lot of meat there for Mathews if he can stay on the field.

 

[Faust]

Collateral Damage: 20 veterans hurt by 2016 NFL Draft

 

[Sabertooth]

He is still there, but I dont think he is really much of a threat.  Turns 33 in June, and averaged just 3.8 YPC on 83 total carries last year.  He will come in for some 3rd downs, but it wasnt like Mathews was going to get 100% of the snaps out of the backfield.  Somebody else will get carries.  Sproles is no threat to carry the ball 10+ times per game.  Should be a lot of meat there for Mathews if he can stay on the field.

I was getting zero interest in Mathews early in the offseason and don't expect that to change.  He's not a flashy pick because of the Chip Kelly hangover.  But he is going to be a in a great position to really benefit this season.  It isn't like he's worn down, he has touched the ball like 200 times in the past two seasons combined.   Barner isn't a threat.  Maybe a cheap handcuff though.

 

[Amused to Death]

Could be a sign that they're worried about the injury?  They've been really vague on his return schedule.  Not sure why they'd see it as a long term issue though.

Also, it could just be that they want to run the ball A TON and figure that having 3-4 talented RBs is better than having 1 who got injured last year.  If they run the ball 30+ times a game, it wouldn't be surprising if Rawls got 18, Collins got 8, Prosise got 4 and Prosise caught 4-8 out of the backfield.  They're going to need a committee to try and replace Lynch's production just because he was so consistent.

Couldn't it also be they don't have a lot of confidence in Michael? They had no one behind Rawls other than a RB they shipped out once.

 

[EBF]

Probably all of the above. They took Michael and Spencer Ware in the same draft when they already had Lynch and Robert Turbin. I think they're just throwing a lot of poo at the wall and seeing what sticks. I'd probably steer clear of the whole group in dynasty. Someone will have value, but it could work out any number of ways. 

 

[Vector]

Denver RB situation will be another hot mess fantasy wise.

 

[joey]

.

 

[gabes1919]

Terrelle Pryor was a big loser in the draft. I was really excited to see if he could get it together and get on the field this year. Thought of him as a last round sleeper. Cleveland's approach of taking a shotgun to the WR board and picking whoever's name gets hit totally murdered his value.

 

[tone1oc]

Terrelle Pryor was a big loser in the draft. I was really excited to see if he could get it together and get on the field this year. Thought of him as a last round sleeper. Cleveland's approach of taking a shotgun to the WR board and picking whoever's name gets hit totally murdered his value.

I'd add Hartline/Hawkins to that as well.  I thought there'd be a ton of targets to at least one of those guys.  

 

[JFS171]

Not so sure on Murray.  His health is probably going to dictate a lot.  

I think it was ZWK in his prospect thread showed Washington's combine metrics were nearly carbon copies of Gio's... and now he's being brought into an emerging offense behind a RB that the team has previously seemed to want to replace.  RBs went very late this year, but I was very curious where Washington landed... and seeing him in Oakland makes me curious.

 

[JFS171]

Gotta think Langford rises after this draft.  Forte gone and just a short yardage back drafted.

I'd take that bet... I think Jordan Howard's rather underrated as a runner.  Go back and listen to the On the Couch podcast where Lance Zierlein was a guest before the draft... he said one veteran talent evaluator told him that on pure running ability, Howard was the best guy in this draft -- ahead of Elliot on pure ability to run the ball.  Now Howard's not the same level athlete and not as good in the passing game, but let's not pretend like Langford's some established guy... He was drafted with pick 106 vs. pick 150 for Howard, then shared work with the underwhelming Ka'Deem Carey. 

Wouldn't be so quick to write off Howard... he can contribute on early downs (IF John Fox allows it, which his MO has been very anti-rookie in the past).

 

[JFS171]

Probably all of the above. They took Michael and Spencer Ware in the same draft when they already had Lynch and Robert Turbin. I think they're just throwing a lot of poo at the wall and seeing what sticks. I'd probably steer clear of the whole group in dynasty. Someone will have value, but it could work out any number of ways. 

Kind of agree with this... in total, Seattle brought in five RBs in total at my last count... three drafted, two more as UDFAs.  Certainly is enough to make me wonder what's going on.  I think the Gianmarco post about these 2nd and 3rd round RBs taking roles from established veterans is interesting and very appropriate to include in this thread, but is Rawls that established?  A lot of people thought Turbin was just waiting out Lynch (he was playing ahead of Michael after all), and we saw how that worked out.  Then it had to be Michael, right?  He was traded for a conditional 7th, never did anything in Dallas, was cut, signed to a practice squad, then finds his way back to Seattle again.  I fail to believe they're enamored with him either.

Prosise probably takes time, but Seattle saw plenty of David Johnson from their in-division opponent and maybe wants that guy for themselves.  That's Prosise's ultimate upside if everything clicks, but that's going to take time for such a recent conversion to the team.  Still, they say he's taking Fred Jackson's role. 

Idk what to make of it all, but 5 RBs in a draft class is a lot... and it tells me they think there's a problem to address.  Maybe it's Rawls' ankle injury being worse than we thought, or maybe they're worried he won't be the same guy when he comes back.  Either way, as EBF said, this is a mess... and I have no idea how it all shakes out.  I probably wouldn't be buying for what the Rawls' owner likely wants.

 

[Tau837]

I watched every Seattle game last year, and my view on Rawls goes beyond numbers. Watching him play, he looked like the second coming of Lynch in his prime, and playing for the team that had Lynch in his prime and used him extensively.

The hype over bringing in other RBs has apparently reached the point where you might be able to get Rawls at value.

• The team already had Michael for years, didn't give him the ball, and cut him once... how big of a threat can he be? Yet he seems likely to be the #2 RB behind Rawls.
  
• Prosise had less than one season in college as a full-time RB, has been labeled as a third down back by the head coach, and has known issues with pass protection and ball security.
  
• Collins is supposedly very similar to Rawls. It seems much more likely that he ends up #4 on the depth chart than that he gets a meaningful share of touches (barring injuries ahead of him). There is a good chance whoever ends up #4 on the depth chart isn't even active on gamedays without injuries ahead of him, unless whoever that is plays great on special teams. Does that seem likely for Collins?
  
• 7th rounder Woods and the two UDFAs are very unlikely to make the final roster (and if one of them does, probably at the expense of Michael).
  

Why would any Rawls owner want to sell? I don't. IMO he has top 5 dynasty potential, and there aren't that many guys who legitimately have that. IMO it is worth the risk to hold if you own him and to buy at value if possible.

 

[JFS171]

I think it was ZWK in his prospect thread showed Washington's combine metrics were nearly carbon copies of Gio's... and now he's being brought into an emerging offense behind a RB that the team has previously seemed to want to replace.  RBs went very late this year, but I was very curious where Washington landed... and seeing him in Oakland makes me curious.

And just like that...

Raiders GM Reggie McKenzie talked up fifth-round RB DeAndre Washington, calling him "more than just a third-down back; he's a complete back."

"He can pound it up in there," McKenzie continued. "When he gets out in space, he can make you look silly. He can catch the ball, but he can run between the tackles as well as well as bouncing it outside. We think he’s the total package as a runner." It's notable because the Raiders spent a good portion of the offseason talking about how they wanted to add to their backfield and get Latavius Murray some help/competition. Washington has been the only addition. He'll have a chance to carve out a significant role in year one.

 

 

[JFS171]

I watched every Seattle game last year, and my view on Rawls goes beyond numbers. Watching him play, he looked like the second coming of Lynch in his prime, and playing for the team that had Lynch in his prime and used him extensively.

The hype over bringing in other RBs has apparently reached the point where you might be able to get Rawls at value.

• The team already had Michael for years, didn't give him the ball, and cut him once... how big of a threat can he be? Yet he seems likely to be the #2 RB behind Rawls.
  
• Prosise had less than one season in college as a full-time RB, has been labeled as a third down back by the head coach, and has known issues with pass protection and ball security.
  
• Collins is supposedly very similar to Rawls. It seems much more likely that he ends up #4 on the depth chart than that he gets a meaningful share of touches (barring injuries ahead of him). There is a good chance whoever ends up #4 on the depth chart isn't even active on gamedays without injuries ahead of him, unless whoever that is plays great on special teams. Does that seem likely for Collins?
  
• 7th rounder Woods and the two UDFAs are very unlikely to make the final roster (and if one of them does, probably at the expense of Michael).
  

Why would any Rawls owner want to sell? I don't. IMO he has top 5 dynasty potential, and there aren't that many guys who legitimately have that. IMO it is worth the risk to hold if you own him and to buy at value if possible.

To clarify my point -- I think it's most likely Rawls... I just think there's an element of the unknown around that ankle/lower leg injury that the team's been pretty quiet about unless I've missed an update.  If he's healthy, I find it odd they spent so much draft capital on the position.  So, to me, that suggests maybe something's going on with that ankle that we're not aware of just yet.

 

[Tau837]

To clarify my point -- I think it's most likely Rawls... I just think there's an element of the unknown around that ankle/lower leg injury that the team's been pretty quiet about unless I've missed an update.  If he's healthy, I find it odd they spent so much draft capital on the position.  So, to me, that suggests maybe something's going on with that ankle that we're not aware of just yet.

From May 3:

Schneider reiterated what he said over the weekend, that drafting three running backs was not a reflection of any new concern about the health of Thomas Rawls. Asked if Rawls will be ready by the opening of the season he said “that’s our anticipation.’’

Again, it's not odd that they "spent so much capital" at RB. Entering the draft, Seattle had only 2 RBs. Even if they were fully healthy, they would need to add 2 more RBs. Now realize that 1 of those 2 RBs is a guy Seattle released once within the past year and who was subsequently released by two other NFL teams. Furthermore, the Seahawks made 10 draft picks, so even though they picked 3 RBs, they still picked 7 players at other positions. Like I said, I think the story is being overblown.

 

[JFS171]

^^ You may be right, and I hadn't seen that quote from Schneider.  Is it not plausible that while they expect him to be ready, they still have concerns about whether or not he'll be the same guy?

Point is, most Rawls owners see this the way you do... I'm not seeing much discount.  If there's a discount, yeah I'll buy, cause he's the most likely outcome and the ceiling is very high.  But I'm just not seeing that discount, and there's enough smoke from all of this to make me not want to pay full price, which... is pretty high, again.

 

[CentralPA]

Ryan Mathews was mentioned once, but IMO he should be getting more press in this thread.  Eagles had a shot at their choice of RBs after EE and Henry with their 3rd round pick, and took a center instead.  Double win for Mathews.  Waited until the 5th to take Wendall Smallwood, who does not appear to pose a major threat.  Looks like its Mathews' backfield barring the unforeseen.  

nitpick fix

 

[travdogg]

Denver RB situation will be another hot mess fantasy wise.

Why? If CJ Anderson stays healthy, I see no reason he won't be a 3-down RB with over 300 touches.

I'd take that bet... I think Jordan Howard's rather underrated as a runner.  Go back and listen to the On the Couch podcast where Lance Zierlein was a guest before the draft... he said one veteran talent evaluator told him that on pure running ability, Howard was the best guy in this draft -- ahead of Elliot on pure ability to run the ball.  Now Howard's not the same level athlete and not as good in the passing game, but let's not pretend like Langford's some established guy... He was drafted with pick 106 vs. pick 150 for Howard, then shared work with the underwhelming Ka'Deem Carey. 

Wouldn't be so quick to write off Howard... he can contribute on early downs (IF John Fox allows it, which his MO has been very anti-rookie in the past).

I'm a Bears homer, and I'd hardly call Carey underwhelming. He's looked very good as a pure runner, especially in short yardage. His issues have been durability related. Frankly, I'm not 100% sure Howard is a lock to be the #2 behind Langford. Also, they love Langford's long speed and receiving ability, and he's the only RB they have who has that. Langford will have to fall flat on his face to lose that starting job. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying Langford is great, just that the coaching staff seems to love him a lot.

If i had to make a guess I'd say its split as follows:

60% Langford plus all 3rd downs

20% Carey plus possibly goal line work

20% Howard plus possibly goal line work

 

[Faust]

Collateral benefits: Veteran players boosted by draft