Rashaad Penny: 2018 Results and 2019 Projections

[MesquiteHawk]

How many yards did Shaun Alexander rush for in his first year? I am too lazy to look it up.

 

[MesquiteHawk]

I looked it up. 64 attempts and 313 yards. Would anyone consider him a wasted first round pick? Guess I am not as lazy as I thought.

 

[thegreeninyoureye]

Rashaad Penny is the least of our worrie I perfectly understand why they picked him up! Some of his runs were great last year Rasaad will be ok. As stated above our injury history over the year justified the pick. There are more busts that come out of the fist round than there are all pro's! Relax Bro Penny is going to have his time to shine!

 

[JayhawkMike]

Comparing the time to develop of a running back to quarterbacks is simply a false argument. Comparing Penny to running backs that he was drafted in front of shows him as having a mediocre to poor draft choice so far. Not a bust yet but certainly a poor choice. If he would have performed more like a Chubb or Michel he probably would have had more chance to run and then more yards.

Also, pulling out some stats from some hall of fame and saying “see, this guy had a poor rookie year and went on to success” completely ignores the vast majority of players who had a poor rookie year and got cut. Exceptions happen but as a rule poor play results in unemployment. But of course this is part of the Seahawks front offic problems. They play the longer shots on their picks and point to the couple that payoff and ignore the majority that don’t.

Rookie first rounder should contribute their rookie years far more than Penny did (unless some qbs in waiting) I hope he proves me wrong but when he was picked I though it was one of the stupider picks the Seahawks made. Nothing has changed my mind yet.

Oh, and the Trust in JS and PC went out the window a few years back. If you trust in them then why be on a discussion board? If every time someone wants to point out the flaws they get shut down then what is there to discuss? The only team that can legitimately use that argument is the Patriots.

 

[12AngryHawks]

Seattle got no where close to first round value last year.

A first-round pick is a means to an end, not an end unto itself. A different first-rounder wouldn't necessarily have elevated the Seahawks any further than they went.

I think many people thought they would pick Harold Landry, he didn't have an immediate impact either, 4.5 sacks, 24 tackles, and 1 FF. Neither him or Penny had a bad first year, IMO. Fans just need to be patient, once he get acclimated, he can carve out a role for himself.

Fans can't label Penny a bust because of his stats after his first season, Penny didn't get a lot of carries, Pete Carroll probably kept it that way because he was the rookie, and they had a healthy Carson and Davis, so of course his stats won't look great. As I said before, Pete doesn't place as much value on first rounders as everyone else, that's why he was content with not putting pressure on himself to give Penny more carries. Think about it this way, Prosise was a healthy scratch all season and McKissic rarely showed up on offense, if Penny was so bad like many fans think, then Prosise & McKissic would be taking more of his snaps.

So right now, I think Penny is doing just fine, maybe we should give it a year or two before we label him a bust.

 

[GeekHawk]

2018 NFL Rookie Running back results:

1st Round
Saquon Barkley. 5.01 yards per carry
Rashad Penny. 4.93 yards per carry
Sony Michel. 4.45 yards per carry

2nd Round
Nick Chubb. 5.19 yards per carry
Ronald Jones II. 1.91 yards per carry
Kerryon Johnson. 5.43 yards per carry
Derrius Guise Injured

Round 3
Royce Freeman. 4.08 yards per carry

I went ahead and did the math for you. Apparently every team's FO that didn't make Kerryon Johnson the first RB picked in the first round are a bunch of arrogant idiots.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[AgentDib]

completely ignores the vast majority of players who had a poor rookie year and got cut. Exceptions happen but as a rule poor play results in unemployment.

You continue to ignore the main point which is that playing behind a great RB who stayed healthy doesn't mean Penny had a poor rookie year. Barkley is the only RB on your list that would have started over Chris Carson last season. You can gripe about Chris Carson staying healthy now all you want but that's 100% hindsight driven opinion.

What matters more for evaluating the pick is how Penny looked in the snaps that he got, and that IMO is still too early to tell. 4.9 YPC is pretty good but a lot of that came in chunk plays and I didn't like him showing up out of shape either. This next year will tell us a lot more.[/quote]

They play the longer shots on their picks and point to the couple that payoff and ignore the majority that don’t.

Every FO has tons of picks that don't work, Patriots included. The Patriots have gotten a total of just 18 career approximate value out of their 2017 and 2018 draft classes so far compared to 67 from the Seahawks (Carson alone has 12). In fact, the Patriots have gotten very little from their first three selections of '16, '17 and '18 yet (Cyrus Jones, Derek Rivers, Isaiah Wynn).

When he was picked I though it was one of the stupider picks the Seahawks made. Nothing has changed my mind yet.

That's exactly how it works when you form a strong opinion too early and then spend your time defending it.

 

[scutterhawk]

Comparing the time to develop of a running back to quarterbacks is simply a false argument. Comparing Penny to running backs that he was drafted in front of shows him as having a mediocre to poor draft choice so far. Not a bust yet but certainly a poor choice. If he would have performed more like a Chubb or Michel he probably would have had more chance to run and then more yards.

Also, pulling out some stats from some hall of fame and saying “see, this guy had a poor rookie year and went on to success” completely ignores the vast majority of players who had a poor rookie year and got cut. Exceptions happen but as a rule poor play results in unemployment. But of course this is part of the Seahawks front offic problems. They play the longer shots on their picks and point to the couple that payoff and ignore the majority that don’t.

Rookie first rounder should contribute their rookie years far more than Penny did (unless some qbs in waiting) I hope he proves me wrong but when he was picked I though it was one of the stupider picks the Seahawks made. Nothing has changed my mind yet.

Oh, and the Trust in JS and PC went out the window a few years back. If you trust in them then why be on a discussion board? If every time someone wants to point out the flaws they get shut down then what is there to discuss? The only team that can legitimately use that argument is the Patriots.

There is no way around it, this is goofy logic by any measure or metrics....Did you actually expect the Seahawks to bench Carson in favor of playing Penny? :roll:

 

[kobebryant]

Fans can be so impatient sometimes; just this whole entitlement era that we’re living in right now I guess.

Leaving out yards per carry seemed like a purposeful omission in order to strengthen whatever point they were trying to make. Which for Penny was 4.9, less than Chubb and Johnson, but more than Carson, Elliott, Kamara, Hunt, Michel, and the same as Gurley.

 

[DomeHawk]

Well, at least we didn't take Ronald Jones, 44 yds on 23 carries? That's less than two yds per carry. Many on the board wanted him bad, I did not. So yes, I can be right once in a while too, lol.

 

[MontanaHawk05]

Oh, and the Trust in JS and PC went out the window a few years back. If you trust in them then why be on a discussion board? If every time someone wants to point out the flaws they get shut down then what is there to discuss? The only team that can legitimately use that argument is the Patriots.

Oh, drop the martyr complex. There's plenty of people here who have criticized the front office over the last few years. The only difference is whether they provide a mature-sounding, data-driven opinion, or whether they just spout absolutes and ingratitude.

 

[vin.couve12]

You also have to remember we traded our 18th pick for Rashaad Penny & Rashard Green. Not much impact last year but i got feeling these two will play great, worth the value of 18th pick.

Indeed. Penny just turned 23 a couple months ago and Green turned 22 a couple days ago. They have quite a bit of time. Green was technically 20 years old when he was drafted and Penny had just turned 22. Green is green. Penny got on the field while playing behind one of the best RBs in football.

This conversation is beyond stupid. The funny thing is, it's largely based off of a draft pundit business model. The OP is reading that last statement as of that's not a problem, but the draft in and of itself has gone from what used to be about aquiring players that you want based on fit and use case to a media based circus that is more intent on making the NFL more money by drumming up more "pundit" talk, sites, advertising, licensing, etc. That's fine and all, but still meaningless.

"No...NO! IT'S 7 MINITE ABS!"

 

[Hawkpower]

Comparing the time to develop of a running back to quarterbacks is simply a false argument. Comparing Penny to running backs that he was drafted in front of shows him as having a mediocre to poor draft choice so far. Not a bust yet but certainly a poor choice. If he would have performed more like a Chubb or Michel he probably would have had more chance to run and then more yards.

Also, pulling out some stats from some hall of fame and saying “see, this guy had a poor rookie year and went on to success” completely ignores the vast majority of players who had a poor rookie year and got cut. Exceptions happen but as a rule poor play results in unemployment. But of course this is part of the Seahawks front offic problems. They play the longer shots on their picks and point to the couple that payoff and ignore the majority that don’t.

Rookie first rounder should contribute their rookie years far more than Penny did (unless some qbs in waiting) I hope he proves me wrong but when he was picked I though it was one of the stupider picks the Seahawks made. Nothing has changed my mind yet.

Oh, and the Trust in JS and PC went out the window a few years back. If you trust in them then why be on a discussion board? If every time someone wants to point out the flaws they get shut down then what is there to discuss? The only team that can legitimately use that argument is the Patriots.

He did perform like Chubb and Michel.

Since he didnt have the same opportunities as many of the other backs, its only fair to look at ypc, which put him right near the top of the heap.

It seems as if your confirmation bias is at play here. Since you hated the pick and grumble about the front office, you will continue to look for stats/etc that confirm your belief to be true. We all do it at times, and that appears to be what is at play here.

Penny is fine. Glad we have him on the roster.

 

[JayhawkMike]

So, it was a poor choice not only because he underperformed but because it wasn’t a position we needed when we had other glaring holes, A healthy Carson and Davis were not going to be sat for Penny.

Agreed.

 

[IndyHawk]

completely ignores the vast majority of players who had a poor rookie year and got cut. Exceptions happen but as a rule poor play results in unemployment.

You continue to ignore the main point which is that playing behind a great RB who stayed healthy doesn't mean Penny had a poor rookie year. Barkley is the only RB on your list that would have started over Chris Carson last season. You can gripe about Chris Carson staying healthy now all you want but that's 100% hindsight driven opinion.

What matters more for evaluating the pick is how Penny looked in the snaps that he got, and that IMO is still too early to tell. 4.9 YPC is pretty good but a lot of that came in chunk plays and I didn't like him showing up out of shape either. This next year will tell us a lot more.

They play the longer shots on their picks and point to the couple that payoff and ignore the majority that don’t.

Every FO has tons of picks that don't work, Patriots included. The Patriots have gotten a total of just 18 career approximate value out of their 2017 and 2018 draft classes so far compared to 67 from the Seahawks (Carson alone has 12). In fact, the Patriots have gotten very little from their first three selections of '16, '17 and '18 yet (Cyrus Jones, Derek Rivers, Isaiah Wynn).

When he was picked I though it was one of the stupider picks the Seahawks made. Nothing has changed my mind yet.

That's exactly how it works when you form a strong opinion too early and then spend your time defending it.[/quote]
I'm in the love Penny camp so far..Good post AD.. :2thumbs:

 

[Donn2390]

The OP clearly has a burr under his saddle towards the FO, and until they can all be replaced with people of the OP's choosing, no one and nobody is ever going to change his mind. He is wasting his talent in his chosen profession when there are so many teams that need competent coaches and GM's...
There is no reason we can't select all pros with ever selection and never lose another game.

 

[Hawkpower]

So, it was a poor choice not only because he underperformed but because it wasn’t a position we needed when we had other glaring holes, A healthy Carson and Davis were not going to be sat for Penny.

Agreed.

He didnt underperform.

His ypc bears that out.

And nobody knew what to expect with Carson. Durability may still be a question mark moving forward. Nothing at all wrong with adding talent to a position where you have an incumbent starter, especially at a position where injuries can be prevalent, the starter is coming off a big injury, and you are a team that loves to pound the rock.

This is a non issue. Go Penny. Go Hawks.

 

[12AngryHawks]

So, it was a poor choice not only because he underperformed but because it wasn’t a position we needed when we had other glaring holes, A healthy Carson and Davis were not going to be sat for Penny.

Agreed.

He didnt underperform.

His ypc bears that out.

And nobody knew what to expect with Carson. Durability may still be a question mark moving forward. Nothing at all wrong with adding talent to a position where you have an incumbent starter, especially at a position where injuries can be prevalent, the starter is coming off a big injury, and you are a team that loves to pound the rock.

This is a non issue. Go Penny. Go Hawks.

Carroll wants to run the ball aggressively, wouldn't it make sense to have more than 1 RB capable of having 20 carries a game? The pick was smarter than some realize. Especially since Davis only lasted one more season.

 

[hawkfan68]

So, it was a poor choice not only because he underperformed but because it wasn’t a position we needed when we had other glaring holes, A healthy Carson and Davis were not going to be sat for Penny.

Agreed.

The bolded is an opinion not a fact. His stats are factual and state otherwise. He performed adequately in my opinion.

 

[KiwiHawk]

So, it was a poor choice not only because he underperformed but because it wasn’t a position we needed when we had other glaring holes, A healthy Carson and Davis were not going to be sat for Penny.

Agreed.

In the previous season our QB led the team in rushing. Chris Carson was the only proper running back to get over 4 YPC (ignoring McKissic and Prosise because they were not every-down backs). Not a position we needed?

We needed a running back to back up Carson, and Penny didn't under-perform. Your narrative fails on both counts.

It's probably also worth noting that using the first round pick for an athlete who would benefit from some development is a good thing because of the 5th year option, which is something you don't get in the 2nd round on.

It's not like we're picking top-10. From a top-10 pick I expect immediate impact and if not a QB, game 1 starter. From late 1st round I expect some rough edges because if he had none he would have been taken in the top 10.