The Leonard Fournette in Seattle piece

November 1st, 2016 | Written by Rob Staton

Leonard Fournette, with a beard that screams ‘I want to play with guys like Jarran Reed’

Here’s what we’re going to do. We’ll look at the possibility of a Leonard Fournette trade-up scenario, we’ll talk about why it might appeal to the Seahawks and then we’ll discuss why it likely won’t happen.

Of course it’s way too early to determine whether a move like this would be even remotely possible. I just think we could use a change of pace from dissecting what isn’t working with Seattle’s offense at the moment (groan).

Right now it could be argued they’re missing a bell-cow stud running back. The thing they relied on for years with Marshawn Lynch and the kind of player they’d ideally lean on with Russell Wilson still recovering from knee/ankle/peck injuries.

The 2017 draft class will have a few good running backs. There’s going to be depth at the position right into the middle rounds. Speed, explosive athleticism, grit, finesse — it’s all there with a mix of very different backs.

Nobody, absolutely nobody, compares to Fournette.

He is the one true tone-setter. A physical, punishing force with breakaway speed and home-run hitting ability. He’ll knock a defender on his backside, get the hard yards up the middle, wear down a defense and then run 70-yards for a touchdown.

He can do this:

This:

This:

This:

And this:

And yeah, he’s a great football player. He’s also a pretty good dude too:

Character, size, speed, unique athleticism, brutality. Leonard Fournette is the complete package.

It’s hard to compare him to anyone. We’ve often referred to him on this blog as the Julio Jones of running backs. That’ll do for now.

Unless the Seahawks’ running game picks up before the end of the year, they might feel like they need a spark at the position. Thomas Rawls could yet provide it — but he has to get healthy, stay healthy and rekindle his 2015 form.

That remains Seattle’s best bet — because Fournette isn’t likely to be unattainable next year.

He might be the #1 overall pick. Top-three is likely. Top-five seems certain.

If you want a tiny glimmer of hope that such a move could be possible, this is the only example I’ve got for you. The trade that took the aforementioned Julio Jones to Atlanta in 2011.

The Falcons traded with Cleveland to move from #26 to #6 to select Jones. It cost them the following:

#26 overall pick (round 1) in 2011
#59 overall pick (round 2) in 2011
#124 overall pick (round 4 in 2011
#22 overall pick (round 1) in 2012
#118 overall pick (round 4) in 2012

Two first rounders, a second rounder and two fourth rounders.

Quite a deal.

Such a move isn’t totally preposterous. It’s not three first rounders like the RGIII deal. At the time the Falcons received some criticism for making such a bold move — but with hindsight they were the big winners. Cleveland were left with a lot of picks but spent them unwisely.

Good players >>>> draft picks

The league and its fans are obsessed with draft picks. Having a lot of picks in the first three or four rounds is great. It’s exciting. In reality most of these picks don’t produce good players, let alone stars. Cleveland aren’t the only culprits. In that 2012 draft where they gained an extra first rounder (used on Brandon Weeden), the at-the-time red hot San Francisco 49ers used the #31 pick on A.J. Jenkins (remember him?).

Atlanta wanted a legit #1 receiver for Matt Ryan. Had they not moved up in the 2011 draft the options were:

Jonathan Baldwin (drafted with their original #26 pick, now out of the league)
Titus Young (a smaller receiver drafted at #44, now out of the league)
Torrey Smith (#55 pick, now with the 49ers)
Greg Little (#56 pick, now out of the league)
Randall Cobb (#64 pick enjoying a productive run with the Packers)

Cobb has enjoyed a nice career so far — but none of this group are Julio Jones. Not even close.

The Falcons did the right thing.

Jones had an ideal blend of athleticism, character and maturity. The investment was steep but the ceiling as high as can be. It felt like an expensive yet strangely safe move.

Cleveland wanted the picks. I bet they’d rather have Julio today.

I don’t know if teams — and the Seahawks specifically — will view Fournette in a similar light. I think there’s a pretty good chance they will. If so, spending a bevy of picks to acquire someone with the potential to be a star is worth it. Again, good players are better than lots of picks. Talent wins.

If Fournette falls into a similar range (#4-#8 overall) and presuming a team like the Seahawks own a pick from #25-32, the precedent is there to negotiate a deal.

Some teams would cringe at the idea of spending so much on a running back. The Seahawks aren’t like a lot of teams. During an era of passing game dominance they’ve thrived playing great defense and running the football with a point guard QB. Having a successful running game is part of Seattle’s DNA. Without it — well you can see the results at the moment.

If you could get 6-8 years out of Fournette (a modest estimate), would that be worth two first round picks and some change? Maybe. If it helps relieve some of the pressure on Russell Wilson to produce, if it helps you keep the defense off the field for longer, if it helps you be the team you want to be. Sure, it’d be worth it.

It’d also help create another huge mismatch problem for opponents. Game planning for Wilson, Fournette, Graham, Baldwin and Lockett wouldn’t be easy. Throw in Thomas Rawls as a 1-2 punch and you’re cooking on gas.

So that’s the argument for the deal. Now the brutal truth.

For starters, it takes two to tango. The Falcons found a willing trade partner in the Browns in 2011. It was an unusual deal. Teams don’t often trade down 20 spots in the first round. The 2017 draft class looks really good at the top. Trading away a shot at someone like Myles Garrett or Julius Peppers or Jonathan Allen is a hard sell. Fournette would probably need to fall a bit first and how likely is that?

The Seahawks have been aggressive in the past with trades but it’s always been with a full understanding of the situation. With Jimmy Graham and Percy Harvin they knew which pick they had in round one. They knew the players available in the draft. They assessed the value and decided Harvin and Graham were vastly superior to the prospects available. They weren’t making a blind choice. They knew what they were trading away.

If you deal multiple first round picks you don’t know what you’re missing out on in the future. Would the Seahawks be comfortable doing that?

For example — imagine if the Dallas Cowboys, fresh from a 12-win season in 2014, had traded their 2016 first rounder away to make a bold move. That pick would’ve been #4 overall. How were they to anticipate an incredible collapse?

It’s unlikely the Seahawks would sink in such a way but this is an unpredictable league. Right now Seattle’s backup quarterback is an UDFA rookie. If Wilson was injured sufficiently to actually miss multiple games or most of a season, how many wins do you get with Trevone Boykin?

Would Seattle’s front office deem such a big trade necessary? They’re probably more likely to back themselves to find an alternative runner on day three or in UDFA. That’s where they found Rawls after all. C.J. Prosise could also end up being a more important player than we realise in the coming weeks.

They would need absolute conviction that Fournette was going to be a star, the price would have to be something similar to Atlanta’s outlay for Jones and they’d need a trade partner. That’s a lot of stars needing to align.

It’s still a nice thought for a cold Tuesday evening just after a loss.

96 Responses to “The Leonard Fournette in Seattle piece”

  1. Curt says:

    Just get a room Rob ?.
    Haven’t seen you gush over a player like this … ever, so I have to believe Fournette is the real deal ?.
    Wishful thinking for the Hawks though?

    • Rob Staton says:

      Very wishful thinking unfortunately!

      Projecting running backs is hard — as we saw with Trent Richardson. But Fournette just has everything. If he fails it’ll be for reasons I/we couldn’t possibly project.

      • Curt says:

        Really love your analysis of all the College players.
        Love the blog and it really would be awesome if we could actually land a prize like this. ?

        • Michael M. says:

          I would pay a significant amount of money for this trade to happen. I would bet a significant amount of money that it won’t.

          • RealRhino2 says:

            Rob’s last paragraph is insightful: “absolute conviction”

            I think outside of a QB such as John Elway, it would be nearly impossible for me to have the kind of conviction it would take to make this move. All those eggs, one little basket. It’s a numbers game if nothing else. One injury, one alcohol problem that hasn’t cropped up yet, and the whole thing could be rendered a bad deal.

            Fournette doesn’t inspire that kind of conviction in me, personally.

            • LordSnow says:

              I agree with Rhino. While Julio Jones worked out for the Falcons, I wouldn’t have done it at the time because the risk vs benefit/reward just historically is pretty low.

              Only qb’s who are generational talents would I do it for. The heavy pounding position of a rb is just too risky to injury to throw away draft capital.

  2. Why I would love it:

    Your “Falcons don’t regret trading for Julio” analogy was perfect. I feel like it would be fairly tough for us to regret drafting a generational RB to replace Beastmode. While I love Rawls, so far the guy has proven to be lacking in the durability department and we also haven’t seen proof that he can replicate what he did in ’15 yet.

    Why I would hate it:

    The loss of our ’17 and ’18 R1 picks…even if they are low R1 picks we could still trade them back and get a R2 and a R3 and a R6 or something for each. Yes we as fans love picks but the Seahawks have proven to be a good drafting team.

    Why I hate losing the picks most is we really, really, really need to address our OL. Now assuming we extend Britt we are set in the interior, unless we move Ifedi out to RT and he looks good there. If that happens then we need a new guard (unless Rees eventually plays well?) and we need a LT. Yes we could potentially re-sign Okung to a 1 or 2 year deal in ’17 (if the Broncos cut him to avoid his option) and roll with Okung, Fant, Ifedi and Garry.

    Still…a 1, 2, 4, ’18 1 & 4 is tough to swallow for a team who drafts so well. Granted for all we know 75% of the guys we take with those picks could be Norwood’s, Poole’s, Tye Smith’s, and so on. Aka busts. So is it worth it to trade up and get a generational talent like Fournette?

    Maybe.

  3. Trevor says:

    Rob I am sold!!!!!

    Given JS success in the late rounds and in UDFA I would be willing to give up that package in a heartbeat for Fournette. He could definitely be a player that would bring the identity back to the Hawks and help them compliment this historical defense.

    We have 2 1st rounders on our entire roster think about that. Outside of Bobby Wagner who have we drafted in the 1st two rounds that you would not give up in a heartbeat for Fournette?

    Also Pete and JS would have an even bigger sell to UDFDAs after the draft if we had no 1st or 2nd rounder coming into camp.

    I think there is almost Zero chance this will happen as you stated he will probably go on in the Top 3 but boy is it ever nice to dream. My favourite player coming out in a long time was Elliott after I saw him dominate the BCS playoffs as a Sophmore and I think Fournette is even better. He is not the all around RB Elliot is but as a Tone setter and physical beast there is no one even close since perhaps AP.

  4. Trevor says:

    Way to early offseason dream scenario

    Rd #1 Fournette
    Rd #3 Bistonaway to play RG /Move Ifedi to RT
    RD 6,7 UDFA let JS work his magic to add a bunch of young talent as defensive depth for Pete to develop

    Extend Bennett
    Re-Sign Shead, Mcdaniel (basically keep entire D intact)
    Sign a Vet QB as a backup

    • Volume12 says:

      It’s funny. Rob likes Bisnowaty and I like Dorian Johnson. Johnson to me is the long, athletic, perfect ZB O-lineman that I could see in Seattle. That is, if Ifedi kicks out to RT, and even then, would Seattle select a pure guard that early?

      • Trevor says:

        I like Johnson as a G as well. The only reason I prefer Bitsonaway is he could be a swing guy IMO. I think if they want a guy who can start at G then they may have to take him in the 3rd.

        What are your thoughts Vol. Any later round guys you think could come in compete for a spot with Rees O right away?

        • Volume12 says:

          Sure.

          There’s a guy from Auburn named Braden Smith who is one of the best looking RG’s I’ve seen all year.

          There’s 2 guys from Colorado St. Nick Callender and Fred Zerblis. I prefer Callender.

          Wyoming’s Chase Roullier, ‘Bama’s Alphonse Taylor, Ohio St’s Billy Price, Utah’s Isaac Asiata (those 2 might not have the length and athleticism), Oregon St’s Sean Harlow, Tennessee St’s Jessamen Dunker, VA-Tech’s Wyatt Teller.

          These guys, except for Harlow and Smith are Guards at the next level. Well, Smith and Harlow too, but they could play OT in a pinch.

          Decent OG class.

      • DC says:

        I watched the Pitt vs PSU game and DJ looked borderline dominant. He plays LG now. Call me crazy but what if we draft him as a LG? Glowinski played RG in college. Let those 3 (Ifedi) battle it out and the best 2 start at G or Ifedi kicks to RT if need be. Pray that Fant progresses at LT and then pick up a the best RT you can find in FA for the right price. We could actually have quality depth on the line and by the end of next regular season I would suspect an very acceptable group.

        LT Fant
        LG Johnson
        C Britt
        RG Ifedi
        RT FA
        swing T Gilliam
        G/T Odhiambo
        G Glowinski
        C Hunt

  5. dawgma says:

    I hate these kinds of mega deals. The Falcons ‘win’ because Julio was what he was projected to be. Washington did the exact same thing for RG3; did they ‘win’? It’s stupid to say “it’s worth trading a kings ransom in draft picks for a Hall of Famer” because OF COURSE IT IS. That’s why you don’t get to to that – you have to trade the picks for a prospect.

    Even at the top of the draft, even at the most sure consensus players…you’ll still be wrong as often as not. When deciding to trade a half dozen picks in the first three rounds, keep in minds that you MIGHT be getting AP, sure. You might also be getting Ryan Leaf or RG3 or JaMarcus Russell. You don’t get to say “would you be willing to trade three first for Adrian Peterson in his prime”? You have to ask “Would you be willing to trade three first for a mystery box that contains Adrian Peterson…or Trent Richardson”?

    • Rob Staton says:

      “I hate these kinds of mega deals. The Falcons ‘win’ because Julio was what he was projected to be. Washington did the exact same thing for RG3; did they ‘win’? It’s stupid to say “it’s worth trading a kings ransom in draft picks for a Hall of Famer” because OF COURSE IT IS. That’s why you don’t get to to that – you have to trade the picks for a prospect.”

      This point wasn’t made in the piece. The argument was — Atlanta looked at Julio’s physical profile, character and ceiling and decided he was a really safe bet, despite the price. That’s not me asserting anything other than what Atlanta saw in Julio and why they ultimately pulled the trigger.

      If Seattle sees a similar combination of positives, they too might consider a trade. We’re not making any bold statements here. Nobody is arguing that Fournette is a sure thing guaranteed to succeed. It’s strange that you’ve gone with that.

    • Michael M. says:

      “Even at the top of the draft, even at the most sure consensus players…you’ll still be wrong as often as not.”

      This statement may not be wrong exactly, but it sort of turns a blind eye to the fact that the top of the draft is FAR MORE LIKELY to yield a generational talent.

      Consider: In the history of the NFL, the top half of the modern first round (picks 1-16 overall) has yielded 89 Hall of Fame players. Combine every other draft pick ever made and UDFA and it’s yielded 90 HOF’ers…

      Yes, high picks bust enough to throw out a laundry list of anecdotal cautionary tales, but if you absolutely had to land an all time great you’d be stupid to ignore these numbers.

    • Kyle says:

      Also, every bad scenario you threw out to us was a qb. Running back is a position that is easiest to transition and pick up for rookies. Usually, what you see is what you get. Sure Trent Richardson was a huge bust, but more often then not, rbs come in and do what they are expected to do.

  6. Ukhawk says:

    Superbly argued. I’d do it; risk worth taking, price worth paying. In thus league the best team usually wins but you gotta have players that tilt the field.

    If good OL was available and Rawls healthy that would be another story.

  7. cha says:

    For me, one of the biggest positives to making such a huge investment like this, is a RB will contribute immediately to the offense. There would/should be very little break-in period of adjustments.

    That means you would top5 and maybe top2 RB production for the full 4 years of rookie salary, and the 5th year option would be a gimme.

    A move like this essentially would mean they could be able to keep an extra pending FA or maybe two depending on contract & cap situation (Lockett / Clark / Glowinski types) because you’re getting so much value at RB for so little cap room.

  8. Volume12 says:

    ‘They’re probably more likely to back themselves to find an alternative runner on day three or in UDFA.’

    This.

    I thnk Seattle will take a physical, tough,but un-sexy back. Think Spencer Ware. Texas RB D’Onta Foreman (who Bruce Feldman says runs a sub 4.5 40). Oklahoma’s Samaje Perine.

    As a wild card and someone that was discussed earlier this year, the SPARQ freak (my guess) Kallen Ballage, RB, Arizona St. who’s unique as unique gets.

  9. Cysco says:

    Is Seattle’s O-line good enough that a running back like Fournette could actually make a difference? Demarco Murray was the best back in football. Then he left Dallas and didn’t take that o-line with him. Todd Gurley was lauded by many on this board (myself included) to be a generational talent. Unfortunately for him, he’s running behind a line that is probably as poor as Seattle’s at run blocking.

    Dallas can spend a top five pick on RB because they know they have a great line. Ezekiel Elliot isn’t even a talking point if he were drafted by seattle.

    I truly hope rawls comes back and we all see that Michael was the problem, not the line. I just don’t have high hopes that this will be the case.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Did the O-line prevent Marshawn Lynch making a difference?

      • Nathan says:

        Hasn’t our O line been fairly decent in run blocking in years gone by?

        • Rob Staton says:

          Very good.

          This year has been tough so far — but it can turn. The injuries haven’t helped.

          • AlaskaHawk says:

            Fournette looks tough enough and able to run over a few players. But I haven’t seen him drag three players along with him the way Lynch could. Also didn’t notice a lot of spin moves, something that Elliot, Sproles and Rawls are pretty good at. Seems like a great talent but unreachable for Seahawks.

      • Cysco says:

        As you’ve said, that’s in the past. totally different people now. I tend to think that if lynch were still here, he’d be struggling.

        • Rob Staton says:

          The OL was worse last year and it didn’t stop Rawls.

          • Radman says:

            why do you think the o line is better this year than last? I’m not sure there’s much good evidence to support this claim.

            • Rob Staton says:

              How about the massive improvement in number of sacks and hits conceded?

              The run game is struggling but that’s as much down to Russell and Rawls’ injuries.

              • Radman says:

                I have a hard time seeing this o line as appreciably better than last year, at this point. I’d argue they’re basically the same but the passing philosophy has adjusted and that’s the reason sack numbers are down.

                • Rob Staton says:

                  With respect Radman, how much of that is living in the moment? Do you remember the Lions game a year ago on MNF? Do you remember Drew Nowak at center, how Britt performed at RG?

                  The sack numbers and QB hits are dramatically improved. The only issue is the run game and a large part of that is down to Rawls’ injury and Russell’s immobility.

                  • CHawk Talker Eric says:

                    In light of RW’s immobility, the reduced sacks speaks even more to the improved OL play this year.

              • LordSnow says:

                Doesn’t this point more to adding another running mate with Rawls rather than selling out the draft for Fournette?

                • Rob Staton says:

                  Only if the running mate is capable of setting the tone if Rawls is out again for a length of time. They can’t afford an annual crisis in the running game.

  10. Nathan says:

    Adrian Peterson anyone?

    Lot of talk when he got hurt that he’s done as a Viking.

    • DC says:

      He helps us more by playing for the Vikings.
      A gift giver if you will.

    • CharlieTheUnicorn says:

      He may possibly retire. Wrong side of 30 and he has done almost everything you can, except win a Championship. He is a HoFer.

  11. Nathan says:

    By the way, are we being a bit Harsh on Rawls when we keep mentioning health?

    That was a dopey play call that got him crunched in Baltimore.

    They’d loaded the box to stop him because he’d marched down the field so easily on them, Wilson qould’ve easily found someone open on a quick throw for a TD, but we get lazy and call another run.

    • Ishmael says:

      Not really, he’s got a pretty extensive injury history at this point. Maybe it’s just been a freakish streak of bad luck, but it’s probably safer to assume at this point that he’s likely to miss at least a few games per year.

  12. Kenny Sloth says:

    Seahawks sign Damontre Moore.

  13. red says:

    I want to see Wilson 100 percent before making judgements on the run game. With Wilson healthy I would not be surprised if it added another .5 yards a carry to whoever the RB is. If Seatle stay put I am thinking Edge/DE Will maybe Demarcus Walker he was awesome against Clemson. If we are looking RB in RD2-RD3 would Elijah be kind of under the radar had a huge year as a soph but sharing carries this year. Joe William of Utah looked real good against UW as well I wonder what his draft stock is at moment 5’11 205.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Walker definitely looked the part vs Clemson. Elijiah Hoods ticks the right boxes in terms of size and athletic profile that the Seahawks have coveted. His production is pretty hit and miss though at UNC.

  14. teejmo says:

    All you training camp superstar fans, rejoice, for the Pope has been freed from New York! That’s right, Troymaine Pope, the young rookie out of Jacksonville St whom so many wished to make it to the roster, was released by the Jets today. Maybe he could make it on the practice squad?

    • David says:

      I’d rather stick Collins on the PS (considering they don’t trust him enough to give him any snaps anyways) and try Pope out to spell Michael.

  15. C-Dog says:

    I would love to see Fournette in Seattle, but I cringe at the risk of giving up any high future picks. No doubt it would be an exciting move if they did it.

    For me, I find my hopes riding pretty high this week on Prosise becoming a bigger factor with the team moving forward. I was listening to Tony Softli on KJR yesterday, and he was pretty adamant that Seattle should start using him on first and second downs, thinks he has it to be a dynamic every down back. I remember Softli being pretty jazzed about him when he was drafted. This kind of has me thinking that perhaps Carroll is ready to give him more of a load, as he mentioned that we are going to see more of him.

    If Prosise can stay healthy and takes off in some dynamic manner, adding something to the offense defenses have to start accounting for, man that would be a shot in the arm at the right time like no other.

  16. CharlieTheUnicorn says:

    To make room for CJ Spiller, the Jets waived rookie running back Troymaine Pope.

  17. East Side Stevie says:

    Blog favorite Joe Mixon was suspended per

  18. icb12 says:

    Undefeated huskies at 5. With one loss TA&M at 4.

  19. Dumas says:

    Haha! Rob, it’s a pleasure to see some logistics. It’s fantastic to see someone so patient, intentional, and precise back one individual’s potential so passionately.

    The deal would likely be even more expensive, given Fournette’s potential draft position 1-5, the the top-loaded though heavy draft. Perhaps a 1st, 2nd, and 4th in 2017, a 1st, 3rd and 4th in 2018. This would be heavier on the front end but might allow Seattle to make up some of their missing picks next year. As Trevor wrote above our UDFA class could be loaded with what seems to be an overflowing draft class. And given our front office’s demonstrated spontaneity in moving up this year, it would be delightful to see them take a draft day trade if he were to fall to 3-5.

    I asked this as a general question a few days ago and so I’ll ask you directly now: given the authority, what would you do to draft Fournette? Would a trade similar to the Atlanta-Cleveland deal have your endorsement?

  20. peter says:

    The case for Fournette for me is based on three things:

    I looked at the offensive players taken from 20-32 in the last four drafts and saw only three players in that range that would be better then the roster, deandre hopkins, brandin cooks, Kyle long. Three players. That’s not a ton and even they may not be who they are here.

    Then I looked at seattles second round picks recently, Michael, richardson/britt, Clark. One a clear stud pick, one a guy really coming into his own picked maybe one to three rounds early (Britt,) and two guys that are just meh. So not a ton of fire power or a fifty fifty win loss if those picks were used in a trade.

    And finally aside from James carpenter Seattle seeks offensive players that are special. More so then most teams and has made investments and moves to underscore that. The graham trade, the harvin trade, the lynch trade, to fielding tanner mcavoy (sp?), even Christine Michael and Paul Richardson. I dont think the team would really lose anything making a blockbuster trade.

    Do I think it happens, of course not. I see them trading back five spots or so ruining day one and picking up a fourth and a fifth and drafting two players we get excited about and then cutting one two years later.

    But if the teams goal is ‘setting a tone,’ then looking to a trade like that could set them up quite nicely.

    • Nathan says:

      Kelvin Benjamin
      Travis Frederick

      • AlaskaHawk says:

        Maybe instead of using seventh round defensive linemen to convert to offense line they should use first round defensive linemen and convert them to offensive tackles. I’m sure Cable would like having the best player possible in that position.

      • peter says:

        Travis Frederick…good catch.

        Kelvin Benjamin, bot so much. His draft numbers are horrible. 32’5″ very. Not for the hawks. But more importantly I omitted him because Seattle is clearly looking for something at WR that the rest of us fans can’t see. They like ‘sudden,’ athletes but don’t look at a Sammie coates and instead field a mostly successful kearse?

        There are if I included defensive players in my matrix tons of guys id love to see in hawks blue…

        My main point is the loss of draft picks to me doesn’t give me pause. And Seattle needs some sort of RB to set the pace.

      • vrtkolman says:

        Not really a huge Benjamin fan. He’s kind of a lumbering oaf and makes several mistakes a game with poor hands and running the wrong routes. There is a general laziness to his play.

        • David says:

          Ditto. His numbers are ok and he makes some good plays bc Cam forces the ball to him all the time, but if he was on the Hawks, Wilson would NOT do that.

  21. peter says:

    Rob this might be corny but about a piece after the bills game highlighting where the team is at, what they may need moving forward, and perhaps some players at different positions that we can all look to and make hyperbolic statements about?

    Mostly id like to see yours and others thoughts about what Seattle may need come draft time beyond the oline…

  22. Jeff M. says:

    Can you find any two drafts in the PC/JS era where you’d want to trade a 1,2,4,1,4 for the best RB in the league? (or even adjusting down slightly for the many drafts where we were without a 1st)

    Would you trade Earl Thomas, Golden Tate, Walter Thurmond, James Carpenter, and KJ Wright for Adrian Peterson?
    Or packages like:
    Carpenter, Moffitt, Wright, Irvin, Turbin?
    Irvin, Wagner, Turbin, Michael, Hill?
    Richardson, Britt, Marsh, Clark, Lockett?
    Clark, Lockett, Glowinski, Ifedi, Odhiambo?

    That’s even being generous by not taking away Russell Wilson/Jimmy Graham/etc. in any of those packages, and still even in the “bad” draft classes you’re giving away multiple starters/key contributors.

    And that’s even assuming you know you’re going to get an AP-level back out of it. The most recent RBs to go top-5 before Ezekiel Elliot this year? Trent Richardson, Darren McFadden, Reggie Bush, (Ronnie Brown/Cedric Benson/Cadillac Williams). Most of the other top-picked RBs falling outside the top-5 have careers about like Mark Ingram/Knowshon Moreno, too.

  23. Troy says:

    Rob, love the way your mind works and the articles you put out. You have been spot on and correct way more times than you have been off, and the loud drum banging you have done with Fournette make me believe he will be a future all pro. He certainly (to my eyes) looks to be a man amongst boys, similar to how Adrian Peterson looked at Oklahoma. And given that his game translated well to the Pros, this would mean an IMMEDIATE boost to the offense as RBs usually adjust the quickest (assuming he can pick up all the protections and playbook calls).

    The question is what deal would you be comfortable with? 2 firsts, 2 seconds, and 2 4ths? 2 first 3 thirds? A 1first, 2nd, 3rd and 4th? Obviously I think 3 first rounders would be too much, but I could see the argument for 2 firsts and some change.

  24. DC says:

    From Deadspin,

    Oklahoma RB Joe Mixon Suspended For Being A Dick To Parking Lot Attendant

    http://deadspin.com/oklahoma-rb-joe-mixon-suspended-for-being-a-dick-to-par-1788473971

  25. Ed says:

    Either Bevell goes, or JG. This offense does not take advantage of a $10m player. Too many games go by without utilizing your best weapon. Look at NE with Gronk. No matter what, the guy gets targeted. He played like 55 snaps at NO and got 4 targets. Are you kidding me. If you are keeping Bevell (which I hope against), then trade JG as part of the deal to move up to get LF and go back to a serious heavy running team with Baldwin and Kearse making 3rd down catches. JG is a waste in this offense and the money should get used other places.

  26. Steele says:

    All of these highlights show Fournette running behind a great o-line through big holes. Put him behind a lousy line, and then see how he does. He is good but overrated.

  27. EranUngar says:

    I’m not sure we can get Fournette for Julio’s price (RBs are much more “day 1 ready” than WRs) but if we can I don’t see any reason for reservation.

    The 2 4th rounders are meaningless for a team that does so well with UDFAs. All that’s left are the extra 1st and 2nd picks we give for it. We already know what those picks bring. It could be a Carpenter or Ifedi or P-Rich and it could be a Frank Clark.

    Having a game changer at RB for a team like the Seahawks trumps that any day.

    Considering that the strength of this draft is safeties and pass rushers, we may opt for another route. We have 3 plays at those positions entering a contract year and anticipating a bigger payday – Bennett, Kam and Avril. With Clark developing into the player we hoped he could be and with the good job McCray is doing, the Seahawks could opt to part with one of those guys as part of such a trade. Getting a “sure thing” and a leader like any of those 3 plus 2 2nd round picks may be enough for a top 4-8 pick.

    If they can swing that, they will add a late first pick to replace the lost player and clear cap space to bolster the OL or extend players etc.

    Either way, i’m all in on this plan unless things change between now and the draft. (i.e. – Improved OL play plus Prosise and Rawls make us forget the whole issue…)

    • GJake says:

      That point makes a ton of sense to me. That said, I have some resevations. Who would we trade out of Kam Bennet Avril. I really cant see the team parting with any of them. Especially considering the fact that they would probably be more valuable for us than a team picking in the top five (most team picking early arent going to value a vet because they

      • GJake says:

        Are rebuilding but we would value a vet highly because we want to win now.) Furthermore, how would we replace the vet we lost if we several picks up for Fournette?

  28. D-OZ says:

    The way the FO covets their draft capitol it will never happen. I certainly am not on board.

    • peter says:

      Do they though? Britt in the second, harvin for a few games? I think more then capital they like flexibility with their picks to move around.

      • LordSnow says:

        But to get Fournette is different from moving around. This would be selling two years of capital. I’d LOVE Fournette if he were suddenly just “there” for us, or like smoked some pot two days before the draft, and suddenly he’s in the teens, and someone is up for their pick and doesn’t want a rb.

        That’s the other problem. GB, Minny, the Giants, Raiders, etc all could use a generational rb. Assuming we’re picking 32 (heh heh), other teams will have more draft capital to get the said generational talent.

  29. EranUngar says:

    Hmmm….Norv Turner just “resigned”….

    That could be an interesting option to shake things up. He is one of the few OC i’d consider over Bevell…

  30. Sea Mode says:

    Harvin unretires.

    Norv Turner “resigns”.

    What is going on?

  31. Sea Mode says:

    First of all, especially well written, Rob.

    The first thing I thought of was what Jeff M. does above, putting names to the type of players you could be giving up to get Fournette. Who would give up a Richardson, Britt, Marsh, Clark, and Lockett to get him? And this draft is set to be deep at the top.

    But I was able to think of some counter points that are beginning to outweigh that in my mind:

    1. The Hawks got all those guys while they had Lynch. They had the one guy they really needed to enforce their very identity on offense. That now seems to be in serious question. Hopefully Rawls can bring it back, but can you bank your chances on him making it through an entire season and postseason healthy when he has never done so, even all the way back to college?

    2. Sure, Fournette is just one player. But think as well how much better he would make those around him. No more double teams on Graham/Baldwin, now you pay the price for leaving a defender to seal the edge vs. Wilson instead of plugging up the inside, etc. It’s not just Fournette’s ability in a vacuum, but how much better he makes everyone else. (yes, including the OL)

    3. I know we want to win forever, and to do so will have to keep looking to draft young talent on cheap rookie deals, but as of now this team is set (if not loaded) at just about every position but RB. (OL doesn’t look to be there in top rounds, OLB probably doesn’t see enough snaps to justify R1 pick, DE/DT we have done well with veteran FA for depth).

    The Hawks draft strategy seeks the player who would represent the biggest upgrade vs. current roster at the position. That would be Fournette, with little room for doubt in my opinion.

    4. PC/JS have gone after “luxury” “picks” on offense in R1 (Harvin, Graham), looking for that mismatchmaker (cue Fiddler on the Roof parody), as Rob pointed out in the article. There is no single greater offensive mismatch than Fournette in the draft this year.

    5. Rewatch highlights Rob posted in article one more time.

    6. Repeat #5…

    • CHawk Talker Eric says:

      #4 isn’t a clean comparison. If they could have Fournette for just their 2017 R1/R7 and 2018 R3 picks – what they traded for Harvin – or their 2017 R1 and a player currently on the roster outside the core group (someone like Lane or Marsh or Kearse) – what they traded for Graham – then it’s a no-brainer of a trade. But it will take a lot more (a LOT more) than that to move up high enough to draft Fournette.

      And Fournette would be much more than a “luxury” pick. He’d be a cornerstone of the offensive game plan for the next 5-6 years. One part of the 3-headed monster that Rob has talked about so many times. In that same sense, if Graham continues to develop with Wilson (especially in the red zone), he won’t be considered a luxury pick either.

      Not sure I’d mortgage the Draft for the next 2-3 years to trade up for Fournette, but I totally understand the allure behind such a move. The scenario depends primarily on a willing trade partner and what that team would want in exchange.

  32. Radman says:

    Herschel walker trade v. 2.0

    No thanks.

    • Rob Staton says:

      Not exactly. The suggestion isn’t to trade an insane number of picks to ultimately pin the entire hopes of the franchise on one player.

        • Radman says:

          That’s why it’s v 2 and not carbon copy :). But the premise is similar.

          No way I’d make that kind of move of draft capital for an unproven rookie RB. Nope. The FO just showed us last year what an undrafted rookie can do. Those guys are out there. And that’s too many picks. We see over and over that the best teams let the draft come to them.

          • Radman says:

            Besides, the esteemed Mr. Cable has told us that in ” his system” any running back can have success if they follow the reads. No need for an elite running back, according to the O line genius. More oerhaos this is one of his more typical major overstatements.

  33. John_s says:

    If you can get 6-8 years of Adrian Peterson in his prime for two 1sts and some other picks you do it. That is what I think Fournettes upside is. Granted like Rob said its highly doubtful a team picking that high would trade that far down.

    Fournette is a generational talent and we need to make sure we surround Russ with all of the weapons possible.

  34. Justin says:

    Fournette would be one of the very few players I could love to see them trade up for and I have a feeling the Seahawks will feel the same. He seems like a very Seahawks type player.