Thomas Rawls, RB, CMU/Seahawks (2 Viewers)

[Tau837]

Listening to Pete Carroll gush about prosise on xmradio NFL channel.  Really likes his wide receiver skills and lined him up at wr in camp and said he was as good as the other guys.  Pat Kirwan seems to think that will be a big part of the team's offense this year - go five wide with Jimmy graham and prosise, catch the opponent with extra d backs and go to a 3 wide run play.   If that's effective it could take Rawls off the field a lot. 

1. Carroll gushes about most of his players. That's who he is and what he does.
   
2. Carroll has also repeatedly emphasized, including within the past few days, that his core philosophy is to maintain offensive balance and run the ball early and often. He pointed out in a recent discussion that over the past few years, Seattle has rushed the ball 50% of the time, and he said he wants that to continue. That doesn't sound like taking Rawls off the field "a lot" in favor of a third down back who can split out wide.
   
3. Prosise hasn't even played a single season as a full-time RB. Ever. He has known issues with pass protection and ball security, and he wasn't durable in that one season at RB. To think he will receive significant snaps this season seems like a stretch, regardless of whether or not they are being taken from Rawls.
   

 

[Tau837]

I agree, but it's hard to ignore the 3 RBs drafted and the UDFA. I didn't realize that Alex Collins was regarded as a Rawls comp. Rawls may pan out, but his ADP just seems crazy high for a guy with such a small sample size and so much competition. He just went RB14 and RB11 in SSL1 and SSL2, which are PPR leagues. FFcalc has him RB8 in both formats.

Seems like we just had this same conversation in the other thread, why switch to this thread for the same discussion?

The 7th rounder and the UDFAs are very unlikely to make the team. Going into the draft, the Seahawks only had two RBs likely to make their final roster, Rawls and Michael. And Michael is a guy the Seahawks cut less than a year ago and was subsequently cut by two other teams... i.e., a guy the Seahawks probably wouldn't want to rely on.

So it was expected they would draft multiple RBs. No surprise there, and no particular threat to Rawls, if he is healthy.

Prosise is likely to be limited, at least early on in his career, as described above. At this point, Collins is most likely to end up as the 4th RB, behind Rawls, Michael, and Prosise, in which case he won't likely even be active on gameday, unless he is an ace special teams player.

The hype over this threat to Rawls has reached the point that people should be buying him from panicky owners in dynasty leagues.

 

[FF Ninja]

I was going to post the link in the other thread, but I found this one first. Plus, the other thread likely never should have existed. It was a dumb thread to start and should've just been a question asked inside this thread.

I don't see much evidence of anyone being cautious in their Rawls lovefest, much less panicking. As the guy on youtube said, Rawls owners are refusing to read the writing on the wall.

 

[Arodin]

I was going to post the link in the other thread, but I found this one first. Plus, the other thread likely never should have existed. It was a dumb thread to start and should've just been a question asked inside this thread.

I don't see much evidence of anyone being cautious in their Rawls lovefest, much less panicking. As the guy on youtube said, Rawls owners are refusing to read the writing on the wall.

Im a nervous Rawls owner, but this news has folks trying to buy him so cheap there's no value to moving him.  

Just because the writing on the wall is legible doesn't mean you sell for pennies on the dollar.

What would you be willing to pay FOR Rawls at this point?

 

[Amused to Death]

Seems like we just had this same conversation in the other thread, why switch to this thread for the same discussion?

The 7th rounder and the UDFAs are very unlikely to make the team. Going into the draft, the Seahawks only had two RBs likely to make their final roster, Rawls and Michael. And Michael is a guy the Seahawks cut less than a year ago and was subsequently cut by two other teams... i.e., a guy the Seahawks probably wouldn't want to rely on.

So it was expected they would draft multiple RBs. No surprise there, and no particular threat to Rawls, if he is healthy.

Prosise is likely to be limited, at least early on in his career, as described above. At this point, Collins is most likely to end up as the 4th RB, behind Rawls, Michael, and Prosise, in which case he won't likely even be active on gameday, unless he is an ace special teams player.

The hype over this threat to Rawls has reached the point that people should be buying him from panicky owners in dynasty leagues.

This what I don't understand either, they only had 2 RBs on the team and one them was already given away to a RB-hungry team, who in turn let him go. But somehow the influx of RBs is supposed to be a indication that Rawls, not Michael, is the RB most likely to lose touches?



And for the record, I'm not a Rawls owner in any league.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

The Hawks cut Christine Michael and were forced to bring him back due to injuries then Lynch retired.

They draft three RBs.

Gosh, I wonder why?

Could it be the Seahawks made a healthy cut of Christine Michael last year and had to pick him back up due to injuries so they clearly showed that they really don't trust or like him or the fact that Marshawn Lynch retired and that they had no depth behind Rawls?  

The guy they drafted in the third round has his role defined by the HC.

http://espn.go.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/19877/seahawks-banking-on-c-j-prosise-to-add-dynamic-element-to-their-offense

Sometimes coaches are hesitant to specify roles for rookies so early, but that has not been the case with Prosise. Carroll has made it clear Prosise is going to be the Seahawks' third-down back, a role that Fred Jackson occupied last season.

...  Carroll said. "We hoped we could get him because we have a very special role that we want to put him in."




 

I wonder if I should listen to a podcast guy that I never heard of before who only has two podcasts and whose style is ridiculously over-the-top and hyperbolic to the point he sounds like a whining child having a tantrum desperately trying to get attention or the Seahawks head coach?  

I choose to listen to Pete Carol and the fact that the Hawks lost a RB to retirement and that they obviously aren't thrilled with Christine Michael and need depth and that the highest drafted RB is going to be used as a 3rd down RB but he's got a lot of work to do on his pass-pro before he will see the field:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/c.j.-prosise?id=2555417

RB

C.J. PROSISE


SOURCES TELL US

 "He's talented and caught all of us off-­guard to start the season. He looks like he has no idea what he's doing at times in protections and that is what could keep him off the field early in his career." -- NFL West area scout

NFL COMPARISON

 Fred Jackson

BOTTOM LINE

 Ascending running back prospect with the physical build to handle a workload, the athleticism to create for himself and the hands to keep stacking total yardage up. While Prosise has the acceleration and play strength to fit into an NFL offense, he needs to become a shade more decisive and has to improve in protections if he is to become a three-­down option. 
---------------------------------------------------------------

Alex Collins was drafted in the 5th round and he is more a threat but I think Rawls will beat  him out and I don't care who they took in the 7th round because those guys are fringe to make any club.  So, yawnnnnnnnnnnnnn.  The Hawks took a 3rd down back in the 3rd round?  Who cares?  Thomas Rawls is the lead back.

 

[FF Ninja]

Im a nervous Rawls owner, but this news has folks trying to buy him so cheap there's no value to moving him.  

Just because the writing on the wall is legible doesn't mean you sell for pennies on the dollar.

What would you be willing to pay FOR Rawls at this point?

I don't doubt that people are trying to low ball you, but given his redraft ADP (and apparently dynasty ADP), most people are still really high on him.

I'd rank Rawls down in the RB20's, so I'm not a good gauge of what kind of value you could expect.

This what I don't understand either, they only had 2 RBs on the team and one them was already given away to a RB-hungry team, who in turn let him go. But somehow the influx of RBs is supposed to be a indication that Rawls, not Michael, is the RB most likely to lose touches?



And for the record, I'm not a Rawls owner in any league.

People are only talking about Rawls because the group think was that he was in line to get the lion's share of touches. Why would anyone talk about Michael losing a couple touches when people only expected him to have a few to begin with? In general, there's rarely a lot of discussion about guys getting drafted at the tail end of drafts.

Just to sum it up, here are the red flags potential Rawls owners need to think about:

1) tiny sample size - he only played 6 games with meaningful touches

2) misleading sample - the Seahawks were winning most of those games (half of them blowouts) so the small sample is also a misleading sample

3) poor measurables - there are always exceptions, but RB is one of the positions where combine metrics are most useful at predicting success

4) poor draft pedigree - again there are exceptions, but RB is one of those positions where draft position strongly correlates to success

5) strong competition - 3 rookies drafted higher than him plus Michael who could be dangerous if he ever gets his head on straight. Regardless of what Pete says of Prosise's role, just remember that Pete once signed Flynn to a relatively big contract and then handed Wilson the job when he won the competition. If Prosise or Collins look better than Rawls, they'll be getting the touches.

6) receiving - as this offense shifts to passing from running, he's unlikely to be the guy on the field, thus knee-capping his upside, limiting his snaps, and making him a boom or bust weekly play depending on game flow

7) injury - very limited information released on his recovery. Last news was that he's supposed to be running soon, which means he's not running and camp opens in 2 months...

None of these are individually damning, but the sum of those parts should knock him down ADPs more than they have.

 

[FF Ninja]

The Hawks cut Christine Michael and were forced to bring him back due to injuries then Lynch retired.

They draft three RBs.

Gosh, I wonder why?

Could it be the Seahawks made a healthy cut of Christine Michael last year and had to pick him back up due to injuries so they clearly showed that they really don't trust or like him or the fact that Marshawn Lynch retired and that they had no depth behind Rawls?  

The guy they drafted in the third round has his role defined by the HC.

http://espn.go.com/blog/seattle-seahawks/post/_/id/19877/seahawks-banking-on-c-j-prosise-to-add-dynamic-element-to-their-offense

I wonder if I should listen to a podcast guy that I never heard of before who only has two podcasts and whose style is ridiculously over-the-top and hyperbolic to the point he sounds like a whining child having a tantrum desperately trying to get attention or the Seahawks head coach?  

I choose to listen to Pete Carol and the fact that the Hawks lost a RB to retirement and that they obviously aren't thrilled with Christine Michael and need depth and that the highest drafted RB is going to be used as a 3rd down RB but he's got a lot of work to do on his pass-pro before he will see the field:

http://www.nfl.com/draft/2016/profiles/c.j.-prosise?id=2555417

RB

C.J. PROSISE


SOURCES TELL US


 "He's talented and caught all of us off-­guard to start the season. He looks like he has no idea what he's doing at times in protections and that is what could keep him off the field early in his career." -- NFL West area scout


NFL COMPARISON


 Fred Jackson


BOTTOM LINE


 Ascending running back prospect with the physical build to handle a workload, the athleticism to create for himself and the hands to keep stacking total yardage up. While Prosise has the acceleration and play strength to fit into an NFL offense, he needs to become a shade more decisive and has to improve in protections if he is to become a three-­down option. 

---------------------------------------------------------------

Alex Collins was drafted in the 5th round and he is more a threat but I think Rawls will beat  him out and I don't care who they took in the 7th round because those guys are fringe to make any club.  So, yawnnnnnnnnnnnnn.  The Hawks took a 3rd down back in the 3rd round?  Who cares?  Thomas Rawls is the lead back.

I couldn't help but read this post in that voice:

https://youtu.be/FXT6XS6rM2k?t=843

 

[3 hour lunch]

During our rookie draft I just gave up 1.11 and 2.11 to get Rawls. No idea if that's indicative of his average sale price, but seemed worth the gamble considering I wasn't in love with any of the rooks available at 11. 

 

[Tau837]

1) tiny sample size - he only played 6 games with meaningful touches

2) misleading sample - the Seahawks were winning most of those games (half of them blowouts) so the small sample is also a misleading sample

3) poor measurables - there are always exceptions, but RB is one of the positions where combine metrics are most useful at predicting success

4) poor draft pedigree - again there are exceptions, but RB is one of those positions where draft position strongly correlates to success

5) strong competition - 3 rookies drafted higher than him plus Michael who could be dangerous if he ever gets his head on straight. Regardless of what Pete says of Prosise's role, just remember that Pete once signed Flynn to a relatively big contract and then handed Wilson the job when he won the competition. If Prosise or Collins look better than Rawls, they'll be getting the touches.

6) receiving - as this offense shifts to passing from running, he's unlikely to be the guy on the field, thus knee-capping his upside, limiting his snaps, and making him a boom or bust weekly play depending on game flow

7) injury - very limited information released on his recovery. Last news was that he's supposed to be running soon, which means he's not running and camp opens in 2 months...

None of these are individually damning, but the sum of those parts should knock him down ADPs more than they have.

On your items 1-3, I can only say this. I watched every Seahawks game and thus saw every snap Rawls played. He looked incredible. I'm not talking about stats, which were great. I'm talking about how he actually looked running the ball, breaking tackles, making cuts, displaying vision, etc. He looked like the second coming of Lynch in his prime. YMMV, but this trumps a lot of what you characterize as red flags.

4. You seem to be implying that there are positions where draft position does not strongly correlate to success. Which positions are those, besides punters, kickers, and long snappers? More importantly, he has now dominated on the field. His draft pedigree is no longer relevant. To put it another way, if teams could have a do-over on the 2015 draft knowing what they know now, don't you think Rawls would be drafted higher?

5. Agree that Carroll stresses competition and the best players will earn the touches. Disagree that this is "strong" competition.

6. This item runs counter to your sample size point. There were two times when Rawls started 3 straight games last season. In the first stretch, he wasn't used in the passing game. In the second stretch, he had 6/68/1 in 3 games. Given that Lynch averaged just under 2 receptions per game in his great years (2011-2014) in Seattle, there doesn't seem to be any reason to believe Rawls cannot contribute at a similar level. He won't be Marshall Faulk, but neither was Lynch.

7. This is the only issue that should be a true red flag IMO. But there have been no reports that say he won't be ready, and there have been many reports that say he will be. If you have to draw conclusions now, I'm not sure why anyone would assume he won't be healthy.

 

[FF Ninja]

On your items 1-3, I can only say this. I watched every Seahawks game and thus saw every snap Rawls played. He looked incredible. I'm not talking about stats, which were great. I'm talking about how he actually looked running the ball, breaking tackles, making cuts, displaying vision, etc. He looked like the second coming of Lynch in his prime. YMMV, but this trumps a lot of what you characterize as red flags.

4. You seem to be implying that there are positions where draft position does not strongly correlate to success. Which positions are those, besides punters, kickers, and long snappers? More importantly, he has now dominated on the field. His draft pedigree is no longer relevant. To put it another way, if teams could have a do-over on the 2015 draft knowing what they know now, don't you think Rawls would be drafted higher?

5. Agree that Carroll stresses competition and the best players will earn the touches. Disagree that this is "strong" competition.

6. This item runs counter to your sample size point. There were two times when Rawls started 3 straight games last season. In the first stretch, he wasn't used in the passing game. In the second stretch, he had 6/68/1 in 3 games. Given that Lynch averaged just under 2 receptions per game in his great years (2011-2014) in Seattle, there doesn't seem to be any reason to believe Rawls cannot contribute at a similar level. He won't be Marshall Faulk, but neither was Lynch.

7. This is the only issue that should be a true red flag IMO. But there have been no reports that say he won't be ready, and there have been many reports that say he will be. If you have to draw conclusions now, I'm not sure why anyone would assume he won't be healthy.

Like I said, none of those are individually damning, so hyped up owners can write off each one with an excuse if they want, but the sum of the parts should be concerning for potential owners who aren't drinking the kool-aid yet.

1-3: people see what they want to see

4: No, I'm stating that there is a correlation which doesn't bode well for him. And again he "dominated" in six games which were situationally beneficial for whoever happened to be running the ball in those games.

5: It certainly isn't weak competition.

6: I'm not saying it is fair - maybe the guy has great hands - but he's unlikely to get the opportunity. I'll be shocked if he's on the field for designed pass plays, third downs, when they're down a touchdown in the 4th quarter, or down 3 scores in the third. His receptions next year will all likely be dump offs and I'd bet on <2 per game.

7: I would bet he is healthy by the time the season starts, but given the situation there, his owners don't want to see Michael or Prosise getting 1st team handoffs in training camp. Again, this is just one of many red flags. Not a major red flag.

 

[Biabreakable]

It's going to be funny when Zac Brooks wins this job. 

 

[Bracie Smathers]

2015        
        3    9    73    Tevin Coleman    Falcons    Indiana
     6    3    13    77    Duke Johnson Jr.    Browns    Miami (FL)
     7    3    22    86    David Johnson    Cardinals    Northern Iowa
     8    3    31    95    Matt Jones    Redskins    Florida

    13    5    2    138    David Cobb    Titans    Minnesota
     14    5    13    149    Jay Ajayi    Dolphins    Boise State
     15    5    19    155    Karlos Williams    Bills    Florida State
     16    5    32    168    Michael Burton    Lions    Rutgers
     17    5    38    174    Cameron Artis-Payne    Panthers    Auburn

    20    7    13    230    Marcus Murphy    Saints    Missouri
     21    7    14    231    Joey Iosefa    Buccaneers    Hawaii
     22    7    18    235    Kenny Hilliard    Texans    Louisiana State

================
2014
    4    3    5    69    Charles Sims    Buccaneers    West Virginia
     5    3    11    75    Tre Mason    Rams    Auburn
     6    3    30    94    Terrance West    Browns    Towson
     7    3    32    96    Jerick McKinnon    Vikings    Georgia Southern
     8    3    33    97    Dri Archer    Steelers    Kent State

    -0-
    20    7    7    222    Storm Johnson    Jaguars    Central Florida
     21    7    12    227    Kiero Small    Seahawks    Arkansas
     22    7    30    245    Trey Millard    49ers    Oklahoma
================
2013
    6    3    34    96    Knile Davis    Chiefs    Arkansas

    10    5    7    140    Stepfan Taylor    Cardinals    Stanford
     11    5    18    151    Joseph Randle    Cowboys    Oklahoma State
     12    5    21    154    Chris Thompson    Redskins    Florida State
     13    5    27    160    Zac Stacy    Rams    Vanderbilt
     14    5    31    164    Mike Gillislee    Dolphins    Florida

    23    7    9    215    Tommy Bohanon    Jets    Wake Forest
     24    7    22    228    Jawan Jamison    Redskins    Rutgers
     25    7    24    230    Kerwynn Williams    Colts    Utah State
     26    7    47    253    Michael Cox    Giants    Massachusetts
================
2012
    6    3    4    67    Ronnie Hillman    Broncos    San Diego State
     7    3    21    84    Bernard Pierce    Ravens    Temple

    11    5    22    157    Bradie Ewing    Falcons    Wisconsin
     12    5    24    159    Chris Rainey    Steelers    Florida
     13    5    35    170    Vick Ballard    Colts    Mississippi State

    18    7    5    212    Michael Smith    Buccaneers    Utah State
     19    7    22    229    Bryce Brown    Eagles    Kansas State
     20    7    43    250    Edwin Baker    Chargers    Michigan State
     21    7    45    252    Daryl Richardson    Rams    Abilene Christian
================
2011
    6    3    7    71    Demarco Murray    Cowboys    Oklahoma
     7    3    9    73    Stevan Ridley    Patriots    Louisiana State
     8    3    32    96    Alex Green    Packers    Hawaii

    16    5    2    133    Johnny White    Bills    North Carolina
     17    5    5    136    Anthony Sherman    Cardinals    Connecticut
     18    5    14    145    Jacquizz Rodgers    Falcons    Oregon State
     19    5    18    149    Dion Lewis    Eagles    Pittsburgh

    23    7    17    220    Shaun Chapas    Cowboys    Georgia
     24    7    18    221    Da'Rel Scott    Giants    Maryland
     25    7    20    223    Shane Bannon    Chiefs    Yale
     26    7    22    225    Anthony Allen    Ravens    Georgia Tech
     27    7    29    232    Baron Batch    Steelers    Texas Tech
     28    7    37    240    Stanley Havili    Eagles    USC
     29    7    43    246    Jay Finlay    Bengals    Baylor
================
2010
    -0-
    9    5    8    139    John Conner    Jets    Kentucky

    16    7    38    245    Jameson Konz    Seahawks    Kent State
================
2009
    5    3    1    65    Shonn Greene    Jets    Iowa
     6    3    10    74    Glen Coffee    49ers    Alabama

    12    5    33    169    Frank Summers    Steelers    UNLV
     13    5    37    173    Javon Ringer    Titans    Michigan State

    19    7    3    212    Javarris Williams    Chiefs    Tennessee State
     20    7    6    215    Fui Vakapuna    Bengals    Brigham Young
     21    7    31    240    LaRod Stephens-Howling    Cardinals    Pittsburgh
     22    7    41    250    Rashad Jennings    Jaguars    Liberty
================
2008
    8    3    1    64    Kevin Smith    Lions    Central Florida
     9    3    6    69    Jacob Hester    Chargers    Louisiana State
     10    3    10    73    Jamaal Charles    Chiefs    Texas
     11    3    26    89    Steve Slaton    Texans    West Virginia

    14    5    11    146    Jerome Felton    Lions    Furman
     15    5    14    149    Timothy Hightower    Cardinals    Richmond
     16    5    28    163    Owen Schmitt    Seahawks    West Virginia
     17    5    31    166    Marcus Thomas    Chargers    Texas-El Paso

    23    7    6    213    Chauncey Washington    Jaguars    USC
     24    7    20    227    Peyton Hillis    Broncos    Arkansas
     25    7    26    233    Justin Forsett    Seahawks    California
     26    7    31    238    Cory Boyd    Buccaneers    South Carolina
     27    7    33    240    Allen Patrick    Ravens    Oklahoma
================
2007
    7    3    7    71    Lorenzo Booker    Dolphins    Florida State
     8    3    27    90    Tony Hunt    Eagles    Penn State
     9    3    30    93    Garrett Wolfe    Bears    Northern Illinois

    14    5    11    148    Kolby Smith    Chiefs    Louisville

    20    7    12    222    Derek Schouman    Bills    Boise State
     21    7    18    228    DeShawn Wynn    Packers    Florida
     22    7    26    236    Nate Ilaoa    Eagles    Hawaii
     23    7    34    244    Jason Snelling    Falcons    Virginia
     24    7    36    246    Kenneth Darby    Buccaneers    Alabama
     25    7    40    250    Ahmad Bradshaw    Giants    Marshall
================
2006
    7    3    10    74    Brian Calhoun    Lions    Wisconsin
     8    3    15    79    Jerious Norwood    Falcons    Mississippi State

    12    5    12    145    Jerome Harrison    Browns    Washington State
     13    5    31    163    David Kirtman    Seahawks    USC

    17    7    32    240    Cedric Humes    Steelers    Virginia Tech
     18    7    38    246    Quinton Ganther    Titans    Utah
=================
Total RBs taken by round:

3rd round - 26
5th round - 27
7th round - 40
=================
Total RBs who overtook the starting RB on the team and who went on to become solid starting fantasy RBs:

3rd round - 2008 Jamaal Charles, 2011 Demarco Murray
5th round -
7th round - 2006 Ahmad Bradshaw
=================
Over the past decade of NFL draft the odds of RBs taken in these rounds starting over Thomas Rawls and turning into solid fantasy RBs broken down by round selected:

3rd round - 2/26 = 7%
5th round - 0/27 = 0%
7th round - 2/40 = 5%
=================
I'll take my chances with Thomas Rawls sticking as the starting RB with the Seahawks.

 

[jtd13]

2015        
        3    9    73    Tevin Coleman    Falcons    Indiana
     6    3    13    77    Duke Johnson Jr.    Browns    Miami (FL)
     7    3    22    86    David Johnson    Cardinals    Northern Iowa
     8    3    31    95    Matt Jones    Redskins    Florida

    13    5    2    138    David Cobb    Titans    Minnesota
     14    5    13    149    Jay Ajayi    Dolphins    Boise State
     15    5    19    155    Karlos Williams    Bills    Florida State
     16    5    32    168    Michael Burton    Lions    Rutgers
     17    5    38    174    Cameron Artis-Payne    Panthers    Auburn

    20    7    13    230    Marcus Murphy    Saints    Missouri
     21    7    14    231    Joey Iosefa    Buccaneers    Hawaii
     22    7    18    235    Kenny Hilliard    Texans    Louisiana State

================
2014
    4    3    5    69    Charles Sims    Buccaneers    West Virginia
     5    3    11    75    Tre Mason    Rams    Auburn
     6    3    30    94    Terrance West    Browns    Towson
     7    3    32    96    Jerick McKinnon    Vikings    Georgia Southern
     8    3    33    97    Dri Archer    Steelers    Kent State

    -0-
    20    7    7    222    Storm Johnson    Jaguars    Central Florida
     21    7    12    227    Kiero Small    Seahawks    Arkansas
     22    7    30    245    Trey Millard    49ers    Oklahoma
================
2013
    6    3    34    96    Knile Davis    Chiefs    Arkansas

    10    5    7    140    Stepfan Taylor    Cardinals    Stanford
     11    5    18    151    Joseph Randle    Cowboys    Oklahoma State
     12    5    21    154    Chris Thompson    Redskins    Florida State
     13    5    27    160    Zac Stacy    Rams    Vanderbilt
     14    5    31    164    Mike Gillislee    Dolphins    Florida

    23    7    9    215    Tommy Bohanon    Jets    Wake Forest
     24    7    22    228    Jawan Jamison    Redskins    Rutgers
     25    7    24    230    Kerwynn Williams    Colts    Utah State
     26    7    47    253    Michael Cox    Giants    Massachusetts
================
2012
    6    3    4    67    Ronnie Hillman    Broncos    San Diego State
     7    3    21    84    Bernard Pierce    Ravens    Temple

    11    5    22    157    Bradie Ewing    Falcons    Wisconsin
     12    5    24    159    Chris Rainey    Steelers    Florida
     13    5    35    170    Vick Ballard    Colts    Mississippi State

    18    7    5    212    Michael Smith    Buccaneers    Utah State
     19    7    22    229    Bryce Brown    Eagles    Kansas State
     20    7    43    250    Edwin Baker    Chargers    Michigan State
     21    7    45    252    Daryl Richardson    Rams    Abilene Christian
================
2011
    6    3    7    71    Demarco Murray    Cowboys    Oklahoma
     7    3    9    73    Stevan Ridley    Patriots    Louisiana State
     8    3    32    96    Alex Green    Packers    Hawaii

    16    5    2    133    Johnny White    Bills    North Carolina
     17    5    5    136    Anthony Sherman    Cardinals    Connecticut
     18    5    14    145    Jacquizz Rodgers    Falcons    Oregon State
     19    5    18    149    Dion Lewis    Eagles    Pittsburgh

    23    7    17    220    Shaun Chapas    Cowboys    Georgia
     24    7    18    221    Da'Rel Scott    Giants    Maryland
     25    7    20    223    Shane Bannon    Chiefs    Yale
     26    7    22    225    Anthony Allen    Ravens    Georgia Tech
     27    7    29    232    Baron Batch    Steelers    Texas Tech
     28    7    37    240    Stanley Havili    Eagles    USC
     29    7    43    246    Jay Finlay    Bengals    Baylor
================
2010
    -0-
    9    5    8    139    John Conner    Jets    Kentucky

    16    7    38    245    Jameson Konz    Seahawks    Kent State
================
2009
    5    3    1    65    Shonn Greene    Jets    Iowa
     6    3    10    74    Glen Coffee    49ers    Alabama

    12    5    33    169    Frank Summers    Steelers    UNLV
     13    5    37    173    Javon Ringer    Titans    Michigan State

    19    7    3    212    Javarris Williams    Chiefs    Tennessee State
     20    7    6    215    Fui Vakapuna    Bengals    Brigham Young
     21    7    31    240    LaRod Stephens-Howling    Cardinals    Pittsburgh
     22    7    41    250    Rashad Jennings    Jaguars    Liberty
================
2008
    8    3    1    64    Kevin Smith    Lions    Central Florida
     9    3    6    69    Jacob Hester    Chargers    Louisiana State
     10    3    10    73    Jamaal Charles    Chiefs    Texas
     11    3    26    89    Steve Slaton    Texans    West Virginia

    14    5    11    146    Jerome Felton    Lions    Furman
     15    5    14    149    Timothy Hightower    Cardinals    Richmond
     16    5    28    163    Owen Schmitt    Seahawks    West Virginia
     17    5    31    166    Marcus Thomas    Chargers    Texas-El Paso

    23    7    6    213    Chauncey Washington    Jaguars    USC
     24    7    20    227    Peyton Hillis    Broncos    Arkansas
     25    7    26    233    Justin Forsett    Seahawks    California
     26    7    31    238    Cory Boyd    Buccaneers    South Carolina
     27    7    33    240    Allen Patrick    Ravens    Oklahoma
================
2007
    7    3    7    71    Lorenzo Booker    Dolphins    Florida State
     8    3    27    90    Tony Hunt    Eagles    Penn State
     9    3    30    93    Garrett Wolfe    Bears    Northern Illinois

    14    5    11    148    Kolby Smith    Chiefs    Louisville

    20    7    12    222    Derek Schouman    Bills    Boise State
     21    7    18    228    DeShawn Wynn    Packers    Florida
     22    7    26    236    Nate Ilaoa    Eagles    Hawaii
     23    7    34    244    Jason Snelling    Falcons    Virginia
     24    7    36    246    Kenneth Darby    Buccaneers    Alabama
     25    7    40    250    Ahmad Bradshaw    Giants    Marshall
================
2006
    7    3    10    74    Brian Calhoun    Lions    Wisconsin
     8    3    15    79    Jerious Norwood    Falcons    Mississippi State

    12    5    12    145    Jerome Harrison    Browns    Washington State
     13    5    31    163    David Kirtman    Seahawks    USC

    17    7    32    240    Cedric Humes    Steelers    Virginia Tech
     18    7    38    246    Quinton Ganther    Titans    Utah
=================
Total RBs taken by round:

3rd round - 26
5th round - 27
7th round - 40
=================
Total RBs who overtook the starting RB on the team and who went on to become solid starting fantasy RBs:

3rd round - 2008 Jamaal Charles, 2011 Demarco Murray
5th round -
7th round - 2006 Ahmad Bradshaw
=================
Over the past decade of NFL draft the odds of RBs taken in these rounds starting over Thomas Rawls and turning into solid fantasy RBs broken down by round selected:

3rd round - 2/26 = 7%
5th round - 0/27 = 0%
7th round - 2/40 = 5%
=================
I'll take my chances with Thomas Rawls sticking as the starting RB with the Seahawks.

That is some serious cherry picking, my friend. Plenty of 3rd round rbs spelled doom for the incumbent, particularly in the last couple. Even if Mason, West, Ridley, etc. didn't have sustained success they effectively ended the fantasy relevance of the back already in place. And to suggest David Johnson, Duke Johnson, and Matt Jones didn't negatively affect the backs in place in just year 1 is dishonest.

 

[SayWhat?]

Can't wait to watch this play out.   

 

[Tau837]

Like I said, none of those are individually damning, so hyped up owners can write off each one with an excuse if they want, but the sum of the parts should be concerning for potential owners who aren't drinking the kool-aid yet.

1-3: people see what they want to see

4: No, I'm stating that there is a correlation which doesn't bode well for him. And again he "dominated" in six games which were situationally beneficial for whoever happened to be running the ball in those games.

5: It certainly isn't weak competition.

6: I'm not saying it is fair - maybe the guy has great hands - but he's unlikely to get the opportunity. I'll be shocked if he's on the field for designed pass plays, third downs, when they're down a touchdown in the 4th quarter, or down 3 scores in the third. His receptions next year will all likely be dump offs and I'd bet on <2 per game.

7: I would bet he is healthy by the time the season starts, but given the situation there, his owners don't want to see Michael or Prosise getting 1st team handoffs in training camp. Again, this is just one of many red flags. Not a major red flag.

So because I have a different view than yours, I am a "hyped up owner" who "drank the kool-aid" and is "making excuses"... I'm "seeing what I want to see." Did I miss anything?   

 

[DropKick]

That is some serious cherry picking, my friend. Plenty of 3rd round rbs spelled doom for the incumbent, particularly in the last couple. Even if Mason, West, Ridley, etc. didn't have sustained success they effectively ended the fantasy relevance of the back already in place. And to suggest David Johnson, Duke Johnson, and Matt Jones didn't negatively affect the backs in place in just year 1 is dishonest.

For every David Johnson, there are ten role players.

Based on the philosophy of the coaching staff, David Johnson wasn't going to get a real shot last year.  CJ replaced the oft injured Ellington and then he went down too... Of course, DJ gets his shot.  As for Matt Jones?  Alfred Morris' numbers were on a steady decline.  Somebody was going to replace him.  So, Crowell splits time with Duke instead of West? 

Was there a strong performer in the predecessors of Mason, West or Ridley?  Serious question.   If healthy, I think Rawls is the guy based on what i saw last year.  No surprise the Seahawks drafted RB often - lose Lynch, Jackson and possibly Michael again and it is clearly a position of need.

I wouldn't sell Rawls low based on speculation.

 

[Buckna]

That is some serious cherry picking, my friend. Plenty of 3rd round rbs spelled doom for the incumbent, particularly in the last couple. Even if Mason, West, Ridley, etc. didn't have sustained success they effectively ended the fantasy relevance of the back already in place. And to suggest David Johnson, Duke Johnson, and Matt Jones didn't negatively affect the backs in place in just year 1 is dishonest.

Yeah, a guy does not have to become a "fantasy starter" in order to destroy the existing fantasy value of the incumbent. Especially in this day and age of increased RBBC.

 

[travdogg]

During our rookie draft I just gave up 1.11 and 2.11 to get Rawls. No idea if that's indicative of his average sale price, but seemed worth the gamble considering I wasn't in love with any of the rooks available at 11. 

That is a gigantic steal. 

 

[Ben & Jerry's]

That is a gigantic steal. 

Curious who else the guy has at RB that made Rawls expendable ?

 

[FF Ninja]

So because I have a different view than yours, I am a "hyped up owner" who "drank the kool-aid" and is "making excuses"... I'm "seeing what I want to see." Did I miss anything?   

You are taking this way too personally. I was speaking generally (for those first three).

But I did find it a little annoying that I specifically said that none of those 7 red flags were individually damning yet you decided to tackle them individually, writing them off with short dismissals. Hell, you actually wrote off 1-3 with essentially a "whatever, he passes my eyeball test" so yeah, I do think you've got some blinders on and the "seeing what you want to see" was definitely directed at that specific comment. And more on that comment... Rawls will never look like "Lynch in his prime". Lynch was a physical specimen. He ran a 4.46 at the combine. Rawls ran a 4.65. While Lynch could run away from guys, Rawls will be getting tackled from behind.

Look, I'm not saying Rawls is definitely a scrub and will be replaced. Not at all. I'm just saying that his ADP is way too high (specifically redraft, as I haven't studied any dynasty drafts). I think he belongs in the RB20s rather than top 12. Those red flags may not look like much individually, but they add up. He's got more red flags than most of the guys taken the next 15 RB spots behind him. How is he ahead of Hyde? I'm not even a Hyde fan, but I'd easily take him over Rawls in all formats. Same with Dion Lewis who basically only has one red flag. Ryan Mathews is currently RB27 and he's got less competition than Rawls. They are going three rounds apart.

 

[FF Ninja]

That is some serious cherry picking, my friend. Plenty of 3rd round rbs spelled doom for the incumbent, particularly in the last couple. Even if Mason, West, Ridley, etc. didn't have sustained success they effectively ended the fantasy relevance of the back already in place. And to suggest David Johnson, Duke Johnson, and Matt Jones didn't negatively affect the backs in place in just year 1 is dishonest.

Just to add to this, with the devaluation of the RB position, I think the 3rd round has become equivalent to the 2nd round 10 years ago. The opposite is probably true of CBs and WRs.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

That is some serious cherry picking, my friend. Plenty of 3rd round rbs spelled doom for the incumbent, particularly in the last couple. Even if Mason, West, Ridley, etc. didn't have sustained success they effectively ended the fantasy relevance of the back already in place. And to suggest David Johnson, Duke Johnson, and Matt Jones didn't negatively affect the backs in place in just year 1 is dishonest.




 

So you think that cherry picking the players that the Seahawks took is a good take and you pat yourself on the butt?  Wow!  You go grab all of those 3rd round 3rd down role players and 5th and 7th round flyers.  I'll stick with the starting RBs and we'll see what happens, lol.  

 

[SayWhat?]

 I'll stick with the starting RBs and we'll see what happens, lol.  

So how does one arrive at the conclusion that Rawls falls so comfortably into this category? Because he played as such for a handful of games when the actual starter was injured last season?  It's not like this is some three year incumbent starter with a reliable track record that we're talking about.  

I now own Rawls in one league, but by no means do I feel comfortable that he has this job locked up.  He'll absolutely have a role, but it wouldn't shock me if Prosise ends up seeing a lot more of the early down work than anyone expects.

 

[Tau837]

You are taking this way too personally.

Not at all. Just pointing out that you are being a condescending jerk in your posts on this subject. Same as you were in the other Rawls thread. It isn't necessary, and your views would come across better without it. 

 

[Bracie Smathers]

So how does one arrive at the conclusion that Rawls falls so comfortably into this category? Because he played as such for a handful of games when the actual starter was injured last season?  It's not like this is some three year incumbent starter with a reliable track record that we're talking about.  

I now own Rawls in one league, but by no means do I feel comfortable that he has this job locked up.  He'll absolutely have a role, but it wouldn't shock me if Prosise ends up seeing a lot more of the early down work than anyone expects.




 

There are too many assumptions about what 'everyone' thinks when no one knows what the consensus believe.  

He is the starter.  No conjecture.  

I posted a decade worth of NFL draft listing every single RB drafted in the: 3rd, 5th, and 7th rounds, and got accused of cherry picking when the ultimate cherry-picking statement is saying that some 3rd round pick is going to start when all data shows the odds are against that happening.  People know the majority of rookie RBs fail. They also know every single starting player will eventually fail or retire but to state that 'this rookie will succeed' flies in the face of reason.    

I'll gladly take my chances with the starter that people are down on and compare fantasy points at the end of the season with the person who banks on an unproven 3rd round RB.

 

[FF Ninja]

Not at all. Just pointing out that you are being a condescending jerk in your posts on this subject. Same as you were in the other Rawls thread. It isn't necessary, and your views would come across better without it. 

I'm sorry it comes off that way but it could be argued that you are being dismissive (also a jerk-like property, although I don't consider you a jerk) by writing off red flags as if I'm chicken little here (when I've already explained I'm just citing logical reasons for a drop of 10-15 spots in rankings). Trying to write off three red flags with your own eyeball test doesn't make for good player discussion.

 

[SayWhat?]

There are too many assumptions about what 'everyone' thinks when no one knows what the consensus believe.  

He is the starter.  No conjecture.  

I posted a decade worth of NFL draft listing every single RB drafted in the: 3rd, 5th, and 7th rounds, and got accused of cherry picking when the ultimate cherry-picking statement is saying that some 3rd round pick is going to start when all data shows the odds are against that happening.  People know the majority of rookie RBs fail. They also know every single starting player will eventually fail or retire but to state that 'this rookie will succeed' flies in the face of reason.    

I'll gladly take my chances with the starter that people are down on and compare fantasy points at the end of the season with the person who banks on an unproven 3rd round RB.

I don't disagree with a lot of your general points.  But what would that data say about Rawls as an UDFA?  And then why does a six game sample where Rawls was an injury replacement himself make him "the starter" as though he's some established starting RB in the league?  I don't think I've heard anyone say that the 3rd round rookie is going to start (please link them if they did).  But there's plenty of smoke leading to a Rawls fire IMO, and especially so at his ADP and current dynasty valuation.  

As for the bolded, have you seen Rawls valuation?  I'm not quite sure people are down on Rawls based on all the data and rankings out there. In fact I'd argue heavily towards quite the opposite. 

 

[Tau837]

I'm sorry it comes off that way but it could be argued that you are being dismissive (also a jerk-like property, although I don't consider you a jerk) by writing off red flags as if I'm chicken little here (when I've already explained I'm just citing logical reasons for a drop of 10-15 spots in rankings). Trying to write off three red flags with your own eyeball test doesn't make for good player discussion.

Responding individually to your points with my opinions on them is not being dismissive or "jerk-like." It is discussing the subject at hand, which is the purpose of this thread and forum.

I don't expect anyone to put a lot of credence in my eyeball test. I am not a scout. But I suspect there are many in this forum that did not watch all of Rawls' games and thus must rely solely upon interpreting numbers and context. What I attempted to convey is that IMO Rawls looked even more impressive than the numbers and context alone would suggest. YMMV.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

I don't disagree with a lot of your general points.  But what would that data say about Rawls as an UDFA?  And then why does a six game sample where Rawls was an injury replacement himself make him "the starter" as though he's some established starting RB in the league?  I don't think I've heard anyone say that the 3rd round rookie is going to start (please link them if they did).  But there's plenty of smoke leading to a Rawls fire IMO, and especially so at his ADP and current dynasty valuation.  

As for the bolded, have you seen Rawls valuation?  I'm not quite sure people are down on Rawls based on all the data and rankings out there. In fact I'd argue heavily towards quite the opposite. 




 

If you go backward with data then you truly are cherry picking.

If you want to pull all of the FA RBs invited to training camps over the past decade to note how rare it is then go ahead.

Once a player goes to the next level and becomes a starter then a new level of data begins noting how long they'll hold onto the starting job.  

We don't know if any of the rookie RBs taken this year will pan out but we do know how many have in the past and we also know that every single starting RB will eventually be replaced.  Right now, Rawls is the starter and I have no reason to believe that he will lose his job to an unproven rookie when talented players like a David Johnson or DeMarco Murray didn't start at the beginning of their rookie seasons and that they were the rare ones who came in as 3rd round rookies to nudge out a starter.  

I prefer playing the odds of siding with the incumbent over an unproven rookie.  

 

[jtd13]

So you think that cherry picking the players that the Seahawks took is a good take and you pat yourself on the butt?  Wow!  You go grab all of those 3rd round 3rd down role players and 5th and 7th round flyers.  I'll stick with the starting RBs and we'll see what happens, lol.  

Not patting myself anywhere, lol.

The cherry picking was in the criteria. This thread is about Rawls, and you posted a list of guys drafted and said only 2 had immediate success AND became long term starters, er go Rawls is safe. I just pointed out that a lot of those guys (more than the ones I listed off the top of my head) basically screwed the incumbents value and role. It's irrelevant to the Rawls discussion what they did after that.

I like Rawls and think he's a good runner, but owners of him seem to think the team using a top 90 pick at his position AND using 2 more picks at the position isn't a concern. That, to me, seems out of touch with reality.

 

[Bracie Smathers]

Not patting myself anywhere, lol.

The cherry picking was in the criteria. This thread is about Rawls, and you posted a list of guys drafted and said only 2 had immediate success AND became long term starters, er go Rawls is safe. I just pointed out that a lot of those guys (more than the ones I listed off the top of my head) basically screwed the incumbents value and role. It's irrelevant to the Rawls discussion what they did after that.

I like Rawls and think he's a good runner, but owners of him seem to think the team using a top 90 pick at his position AND using 2 more picks at the position isn't a concern. That, to me, seems out of touch with reality.




 

The thread is about Rawls and morphed into the current iteration of commenting on two-podcast guy's take attacking the naivety of Rawls owners who he feels are too stupid to see the obvious writing on the wall of the Hawks taking 3 running backs in the draft with the conclusion that Seattle wants to replace Rawls now.

Um, no I don't agree with two-podcast guy's Rawls take because he skips right past the obvious, Marshawn Lynch retirement opening up one hole at RB and Christine Michael getting cut two times by two teams last year, one being the Seahawks who chose Thomas instead of Christine Michael a former 2nd round pick.  So that would be two openings at the RB position.  

Procise has already been tabbed for the 3rd down RB role as stated by the head coach of the Seahawks Pete Carol.  I have reason to believe him since Procise has issues in pass pro and the latest reports said they were using him as a  wideout in third down situations which makes sense since his one big detriment is pass pro so instead of keeping him in the backfield they are splitting him wide with the intention to iso him on a LB.  Logical use of a former college WR with WR skills and a weakness in pass protection as a RB.  

One of the biggest reasons why rookie RBs don't see the field is failures in pass protection but they can get him on the field in sub packages so this makes a lot of sense but isn't the threat to a starting RB from a rookie who doesn't know pass protections.  Add in the concussion and high ankle sprain suffered by Procise and the take he is going to take over as a rookie is out of touch with reality even before factoring in the low percentage of rookie RBs taken in the 3rd round who have taken over as rookies.  

 

[FF Ninja]

Responding individually to your points with my opinions on them is not being dismissive or "jerk-like." It is discussing the subject at hand, which is the purpose of this thread and forum.

I don't expect anyone to put a lot of credence in my eyeball test. I am not a scout. But I suspect there are many in this forum that did not watch all of Rawls' games and thus must rely solely upon interpreting numbers and context. What I attempted to convey is that IMO Rawls looked even more impressive than the numbers and context alone would suggest. YMMV.

No, responding individually in itself wasn't, but the dismissive tone and weak evidence to support dismissing the red flags implies you are not open for discussion on the matter. Again, I don't see you as a jerk and only used the phrase "jerk-like" since you used a similar phrase. I really don't even mind how you responded, but was just pointing out that if me presenting some red flags, questioning his ranking, and noting that an eyeball test doesn't constitute as evidence all count as condescending then using that level of sensitivity might trigger the sensitivity police on your dismissive response.

Anyway, like I said originally, none of those 7 red flags is individually damning, which means people can easily come along and shoot a hole in each one - and by that I mean present a case where it is plausible that the red flag doesn't come back to bite Rawls, not actually refute the red flag. But I knew someone would come present that plausible case and act like it was refuting the point. But in reality, all it takes is for one of those red flags to be a reality and suddenly you've got an RB1 redraft bust. And if the red flags were rock solid evidence of a deficiency then they wouldn't be red flags, they'd be glaring problems that would cause his stock to plummet.

I've already stated the case for a lower ranking for Rawls, so I've got nothing to add here. I maintain that there's nothing condescending about bringing up red flags or questioning the logic behind dismissing the red flags. I'm genuinely sorry if any of that offended you, though. There was no malicious intent.

 

[DropKick]

Not patting myself anywhere, lol.

The cherry picking was in the criteria. This thread is about Rawls, and you posted a list of guys drafted and said only 2 had immediate success AND became long term starters, er go Rawls is safe. I just pointed out that a lot of those guys (more than the ones I listed off the top of my head) basically screwed the incumbents value and role. It's irrelevant to the Rawls discussion what they did after that.

I like Rawls and think he's a good runner, but owners of him seem to think the team using a top 90 pick at his position AND using 2 more picks at the position isn't a concern. That, to me, seems out of touch with reality.

Again, given that the Hawks lost Lynch and Jackson and may not retain Michael, you're putting way too much emphasis on their drafting of backs.  You have to field a football team.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

JTD makes a fair point.  A list of 3rd/5th round RBs that became long-term starters is a lot more relevant in a thread about CJ Prosise or Alex Collins than it is in a thread about Thomas Rawls.  As was mentioned, there are plenty of these RBs that didn't become long-term starters but still impacted the incumbent or even signaled the team starting to think about moving on from the incumbent, if we can even call Rawls an incumbent at this point.

Spouting off stuff like "I'll take my chances that Rawls will score more points than Prosise this year" is entirely useless when no one I'm aware of is arguing that you should draft Prosise in round 2 of a dynasty startup draft because he's probably going to be the Seahawks starting RB this year.  This is pretty much the definition of straw-man.

 

[Ben & Jerry's]

I think Prosise projects to be a 3rd down/passing down back. Potentially a very good one. However, if Rawls goes down or disappoints, I envision Collins getting the bulk of the early down carries.

 

[jtd13]

Again, given that the Hawks lost Lynch and Jackson and may not retain Michael, you're putting way too much emphasis on their drafting of backs.  You have to field a football team.

Why use a premium pick on a RB? Why not go back to the UDFA well if all they want is depth?

 

[Borden]

Why use a premium pick on a RB? Why not go back to the UDFA well if all they want is depth?

They did. They signed Tre Madden.

They also drafted Zac Brooks in the 7th.

Edit: Rawls also has injury concerns. Having a capable back is important. Not many UDFA players turn into Rawls/Foster types. 

 

[DropKick]

Why use a premium pick on a RB? Why not go back to the UDFA well if all they want is depth?

I don't consider the 3rd round a "premium" pick.  They used a second (their first overall) on Michael when Lynch was in his prime.  You're talking about a team with almost no depth and the reality (attrition) of an NFL season. So, I'll go with they drafted Prosise because they thought he was the best player available or could help them win football games.  Why do you draft anyone?   What I don't like is the conclusions you're jumping to... just because every pick needs an ulterior motive.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Why use a premium pick on a RB? Why not go back to the UDFA well if all they want is depth?

They needed to...

1) Rawls only has 1 season. He looked exactly the part for this teams fit, but you cant rely on just 1 back year after year. Ask NE, Pitt, Balt, GB, etc.

2) Their 3rd down back, which they leaned on when when Lynch was a workhorse is long gone.

3) The other 3rd down back they added to replace the first is also gone.

4) They dont really like their depth, the preference is to let Michael go (or have Michael have an unforeseen mental changeover).

5) They have 4 rookies and could still land a free agent, or even a grab a to-be-cut free agent.

6) Easiest way to offset the planned work Rawls gets (or unplanned for Michael or Allen) is to get a more pass oriented RB - who just happens to be just as much WR - for 3rd/pass down duties.

7) You always want to add talent. Especially at a position that gets banged up a ton.

As for a "premium" pick... I have old post around here stating the % chance a late 3rd rounder or 4th rounder hit = its really low odds. But getting a highly pass centric RB should offset on him hitting as at least usable for the Seahawks for a few years. If he can quickly get a grasp of the plays/calls/reads and responsibilities (the anti Christine Michael) he is damn near guaranteed some time for the benefit of the team.

 

[Borden]

They needed to...

1) Rawls only has 1 season. He looked exactly the part for this teams fit, but you cant rely on just 1 back year after year. Ask NE, Pitt, Balt, GB, etc.

2) Their 3rd down back, which they leaned on when when Lynch was a workhorse is long gone.

3) The other 3rd down back they added to replace the first is also gone.

4) They dont really like their depth, the preference is to let Michael go (or have Michael have an unforeseen mental changeover).

5) They have 4 rookies and could still land a free agent, or even a cut free agent.

6) Easiest way to offset the planned work Rawls (or unplanned for Michael or Allen) is to get a more pass oriented RB - who just happens to be just as much WR - for 3rd/pass down duties.

7) You always want to add talent. Esepcially at a position that gets banged up a ton.

As for a "premium" pick... I have old post around here stating the % chance a late 3rd rounder or 4th rounder hit = its really low odds. But getting a highly pass centric RB should offset on him hitting as at least usable for the Seahawks for a few years. If he can quickly get a grasp of the plays/calls/reads and responsibilities (the anti Christine Michael) he is damn near guaranteed some time for the benefit of the team.

So, you're saying the Seahawks third round pick is the anti-Christ(ine)?

 

[BigSteelThrill]

After what happened in the Christine Michael thread... he may be close to it.  Or his fans are, at least.

 

[Borden]

After what happened in the Christine Michael thread... he may be close to it.  Or his fans are, at least.

Did you mean to say... Prosisely?

 

[jtd13]

I don't consider the 3rd round a "premium" pick.  They used a second (their first overall) on Michael when Lynch was in his prime.  You're talking about a team with almost no depth and the reality (attrition) of an NFL season. So, I'll go with they drafted Prosise because they thought he was the best player available or could help them win football games.  Why do you draft anyone?   What I don't like is the conclusions you're jumping to... just because every pick needs an ulterior motive.

 I'm not sure which conclusion you think I'm jumping to, but I think you are misreading what I am saying. I'm responding to the people assuming Rawls is at no risk to lose his job based on a few games that happened to be positive gameflow. I never said he was bad or that he would lose his job. I just think the are several other possible outcomes. With his track record, he might be the best back on his team, or he might not even be the 2nd best. We haven't seen enough to say either way definitively. I'd have more confidence that Seattle feels they can trust him If they didn't invest heavily on the position, which a 3rd+5th+7th is definitely heavily investing in a position like RB. 

 

[DropKick]

 I'm not sure which conclusion you think I'm jumping to, but I think you are misreading what I am saying. I'm responding to the people assuming Rawls is at no risk to lose his job based on a few games that happened to be positive gameflow. I never said he was bad or that he would lose his job. I just think the are several other possible outcomes. With his track record, he might be the best back on his team, or he might not even be the 2nd best. We haven't seen enough to say either way definitively. I'd have more confidence that Seattle feels they can trust him If they didn't invest heavily on the position, which a 3rd+5th+7th is definitely heavily investing in a position like RB. 

Just about every player in the NFL is at risk of losing their job eventually.

The conclusion you're jumping to is the drafting of backs translates into their displeasure with Rawls.   I've said it several times; they lost Lynch and Jackson and they demonstrated their frustration with Michael once already and probably aren't thrilled with Brown either.    They needed RBs and they needed depth; I don't think what they did in the draft is overly remarkable when you consider they had to reacquire Michael for their play-off run last year after a series of injuries.  From what I understand Prosise may not be that polished as a back but could excel as a receiver.  Collins seems to be more in the Lynch mold (bruiser).  Its the NFL - nearly every back is going to have competition.

 

[Borden]

 I'm not sure which conclusion you think I'm jumping to, but I think you are misreading what I am saying. I'm responding to the people assuming Rawls is at no risk to lose his job based on a few games that happened to be positive gameflow. I never said he was bad or that he would lose his job. I just think the are several other possible outcomes. With his track record, he might be the best back on his team, or he might not even be the 2nd best. We haven't seen enough to say either way definitively. I'd have more confidence that Seattle feels they can trust him If they didn't invest heavily on the position, which a 3rd+5th+7th is definitely heavily investing in a position like RB. 

I think this is where you are running into problems with everyone. The Seahawks have 6 RBs on their roster. If you aren't counting rookies, they have 2. One that they let go once already and one that if coming off a broken ankle. They are still a run heavy team that expects to be still playing after the regular season ends. Add that in with the fact they experienced what happens if you don't have running back depth last year and you can see why they went so RB heavy. Not out of lack of confidence but out of pure need. 

If you were to say, "more new faces presents more new challengers for the lead RB role in Seattle" you might be on to something. Especially, since Seattle is a team that prides itself on "the best players play" ideology. I might agree with you more if this was your approach. Because really, it's not like these are a bunch of guys that Rawls has already beat out to get the job.

 

[Tau837]

Another point regarading the draft is that the Seahawks drafted 10 players this year, more than all but 5 teams: CLE (14), BAL (11), SFO (11), DET (10), TEN (10).

They had more picks than most teams. They had a shortage of RBs. They just suffered a rash of injuries at RB last season that negatively impacted their postseason. Occam's Razor.

 

[FF Ninja]

 I'm not sure which conclusion you think I'm jumping to, but I think you are misreading what I am saying. I'm responding to the people assuming Rawls is at no risk to lose his job based on a few games that happened to be positive gameflow. I never said he was bad or that he would lose his job. I just think the are several other possible outcomes. With his track record, he might be the best back on his team, or he might not even be the 2nd best. We haven't seen enough to say either way definitively. I'd have more confidence that Seattle feels they can trust him If they didn't invest heavily on the position, which a 3rd+5th+7th is definitely heavily investing in a position like RB. 

Everyone wants to jump on you for highly regarding the rookies, but no one seems to want to touch the bolded (other than JWB's eyeball test {no offense intended, JWB... just stating the facts}). It would not be the first time that circumstance made a JAG look like a legitimate NFL starter (not saying Rawls = JAG, just that the book is not yet written). I'm not one of those people who will say "look at CJA" as an example since I think CJA is actually good as shown by his production after he got healthy last year (I think he's one of the guys that should be drafted ahead of Rawls), but I don't recommend drafting a guy as an RB1 based on a 6 game sample plus positive gameflow in all of those games.

I generally agree with the point that rookies drafted in the 3rd round or later had the odds stacked against them, but I really think that data is skewed by the fact that RBs used to be drafted higher. When was the last time the third RB off the board was in the third round? Has that ever happened? I think it would be more useful to gauge NFL success based on draft order of the position rather than draft round at this point in time. For those keeping track, Prosise was the 4th RB off the board. SP favorite David Johnson (compared to Prosise by some) was the 7th RB taken last year while Abdullah, now panned in the SP, was the 4th. Sims was 4th in 2014 while Freeman was 8th. Lacy was the 4th in 2013 (Michael was the 5th). The 4th RB off the board has been pretty decent NFL talent of late. No studs (although Lacy was close before conditioning issues) but all of those guys would pose significant threats to Rawls' workload.

I also agree with those that say once a guy has produced at the NFL level, his draft position is no longer relevant to his chances of success, but I think a guy with a tiny, extremely beneficial situational sample size might be the exception to that rule.

Finally, I know it is en vogue to glibly write off Christine Michael due to the ridiculous hype he received and his middling playing opportunities, but people act like he's Trent Richardson - a guy who has gotten a ton of touches and shown a lack of on field ability - but in reality his problems have not been ability related (even dating back to college and his poor relationship with Kevin Sumlin). I agree that at this point his chances of turning it around are less than 50%, but it is definitely a nonzero chance and the guy has the talent and measurables to make Rawls irrelevant.

I'm also just going to leave this here:

http://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/marshawn-lynch/

http://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/thomas-rawls/

http://www.playerprofiler.com/nfl/christine-michael/

 

[Amused to Death]

Finally, I know it is en vogue to glibly write off Christine Michael due to the ridiculous hype he received and his middling playing opportunities, but people act like he's Trent Richardson - a guy who has gotten a ton of touches and shown a lack of on field ability - but in reality his problems have not been ability related (even dating back to college and his poor relationship with Kevin Sumlin). I agree that at this point his chances of turning it around are less than 50%, but it is definitely a nonzero chance and the guy has the talent and measurables to make Rawls irrelevant.

I think people write off Christine Michael because the team that drafted him did and so did a team desperate for an RB.  His lack of touches is a result of his inability to show the teams that he's deserving of more touches.  At some point, the teams actually do know better than FFL guys.

 

[Biabreakable]

I think it would be more useful to gauge NFL success based on draft order of the position rather than draft round at this point in time. 

More useful in what way?

Do it then.