Lance Dunbar visiting Hawks

pehawk · Mar 13, 2016

Waaaaaay better 3rd down option to Fred.

Barthawk · Mar 13, 2016

agree.. at par with Theo Riddick IMO

Hawk Finn · Mar 13, 2016

Agreed. This news is tingly.

kearly · Mar 13, 2016

If Seattle is going to replace Jackson, I'd prefer it to be with another 215 pound back who can block. Dunbar is 195 pounds.

Dunbar has some similar traits to Rawls, so I would think that they are looking at Dunbar as a committee back.

Dunbar is coming off a pretty bad knee injury and I'm not sure how I would feel if Seattle gave him even a little guaranteed money. But I do like the player and I think he's a good fit for the new Seahawks offense that appeared in 2015. He's probably a better fit for Seattle's current scheme than the power scheme in Dallas.

kearly · Mar 13, 2016

I feel relieved that Seattle kicked the tires on Lance Dunbar but not Chris Ivory or Toby Gerhart, etc.

Maybe I'm reading into things too much, but I think the success of Thomas Rawls has caused Seattle to rethink what type of RB is ideal for Tom Cable's system. Namely, the undersized, elusive, super quick, pretty fast RB who adds "spark" to the offense. Seattle isn't looking for the next Marshawn Lynch anymore. They are looking for the next Warrick Dunn (which is what I think Rawls is going to be, health permitting).

So even if they don't sign Dunbar, I think Seattle's interest in Dunbar is interesting and probably encouraging. It shows that Seattle is willing to adapt quickly to new types of players that will succeed in Seattle's scheme.

pcbball12 · Mar 13, 2016

kearly":2xwsxtn0 said:
I feel relieved that Seattle kicked the tires on Lance Dunbar but not Chris Ivory or Toby Gerhart, etc.

Maybe I'm reading into things too much, but I think the success of Thomas Rawls has caused Seattle to rethink what type of RB is ideal for Tom Cable's system. Namely, the undersized, elusive, super quick, pretty fast RB who adds "spark" to the offense. Seattle isn't looking for the next Marshawn Lynch anymore. They are looking for the next Warrick Dunn (which is what I think Rawls is going to be, health permitting).

So even if they don't sign Dunbar, I think Seattle's interest in Dunbar is interesting and probably encouraging. It shows that Seattle is willing to adapt quickly to new types of players that will succeed in Seattle's scheme.

Kearly, can you explain your comparison of Rawls and Dunn? While I don't like the comparison myself, I am curious as to why that is your comparison as I respect your opinion.

To me, while Rawls has great feet and cutting ability he is also very physical (what Seattle wants in a lead back). While he can make guys miss and does with great cuts, he also looks for contact and to run over guys. He is short, but also listed at 215 so the overall frame on him is totally a workhorse type of body built for taking hits. I am struggling to come up with a comparison of my own, maybe Mark Ingram? Similar build (both weigh 215) and I believe their combine results were easily similar.

In regard to Dunbar, I have liked him for a few years now but he has had some terrible luck with injuries. If he could just get through a whole season healthy he would probably be considered one of the better change of pace backs in the game. This will make him nice and cheap though. I believe they are looking to add a COP/3rd down back via free agency or draft this year and wait until next year's loaded RB class to get another workhorse type to pair with Rawls.

QuahHawk · Mar 13, 2016

I give Dunbar about $2.5 mil, it adds some great potential. Still would like to add another RB mid to late draft or bring C-Mike back for close to minimum.

Cyrus12 · Mar 13, 2016

will probably convert him to o line...

bjornanderson21 · Mar 13, 2016

Not interested in giving decent money to anyone who isn't likely to win the job over Rawls.

Michael showed enough in his "last chance" to be brought back on a cheap deal, if possible.

Otherwise just look for someone in the draft that fits what they're looking for. Even a mid-late round pick can come in as the backup or 3rd string easily.

Keep it cheap.

chris98251 · Mar 13, 2016

bjornanderson21":3qsbajf2 said:
Not interested in giving decent money to anyone who isn't likely to win the job over Rawls.

Michael showed enough in his "last chance" to be brought back on a cheap deal, if possible.

Otherwise just look for someone in the draft that fits what they're looking for. Even a mid-late round pick can come in as the backup or 3rd string easily.

Keep it cheap.

You don't bring in anyone that can't push and or challenge Rawls, whats the point of that player if he isn't good enough to take over in the event of an injury. Doesn't mean you have to break the bank, does mean you have to scout well and the price is what you pay depending on the projection and research you have done on where he will go.

pehawk · Mar 13, 2016

bjornanderson21":1u8hvr77 said:
Not interested in giving decent money to anyone who isn't likely to win the job over Rawls.

Michael showed enough in his "last chance" to be brought back on a cheap deal, if possible.

Otherwise just look for someone in the draft that fits what they're looking for. Even a mid-late round pick can come in as the backup or 3rd string easily.

Keep it cheap.

Hawks ain't gonna go into the draft with a glaring need. And a RB is a glaring need.

seatownlowdown · Mar 13, 2016

:?

#FreeChristineMichael

Ozzy · Mar 13, 2016

Hoping for a Rawls, michael, Dunbar backfield next year. Michael can be the main guy if anything happens go Rawls and Dunbar is your explosive third down guy.

Smellyman · Mar 13, 2016

pcbball12":3qy4nu7j said:
kearly":3qy4nu7j said:

I feel relieved that Seattle kicked the tires on Lance Dunbar but not Chris Ivory or Toby Gerhart, etc.

Maybe I'm reading into things too much, but I think the success of Thomas Rawls has caused Seattle to rethink what type of RB is ideal for Tom Cable's system. Namely, the undersized, elusive, super quick, pretty fast RB who adds "spark" to the offense. Seattle isn't looking for the next Marshawn Lynch anymore. They are looking for the next Warrick Dunn (which is what I think Rawls is going to be, health permitting).

So even if they don't sign Dunbar, I think Seattle's interest in Dunbar is interesting and probably encouraging. It shows that Seattle is willing to adapt quickly to new types of players that will succeed in Seattle's scheme.

Click to expand...

Kearly, can you explain your comparison of Rawls and Dunn? While I don't like the comparison myself, I am curious as to why that is your comparison as I respect your opinion.

To me, while Rawls has great feet and cutting ability he is also very physical (what Seattle wants in a lead back). While he can make guys miss and does with great cuts, he also looks for contact and to run over guys. He is short, but also listed at 215 so the overall frame on him is totally a workhorse type of body built for taking hits. I am struggling to come up with a comparison of my own, maybe Mark Ingram? Similar build (both weigh 215) and I believe their combine results were easily similar.

In regard to Dunbar, I have liked him for a few years now but he has had some terrible luck with injuries. If he could just get through a whole season healthy he would probably be considered one of the better change of pace backs in the game. This will make him nice and cheap though. I believe they are looking to add a COP/3rd down back via free agency or draft this year and wait until next year's loaded RB class to get another workhorse type to pair with Rawls.

Rawls is like Doug Martin to me.

massari · Mar 13, 2016

kearly":bbl457no said:
If Seattle is going to replace Jackson, I'd prefer it to be with another 215 pound back who can block. Dunbar is 195 pounds.

Jacquizz Rodgers was rated the best blocking RB by PFF in 2014 before he was injured last season and he's listed as 199 pounds. Both are pretty short stocky guys. From what I read, Dunbar sounds like a good willing blocker.

Being from Louisiana, never thought he'd consider leaving Texas for Seattle.

If they're unable to sign Dunbar for cheap, I'm hoping for Bobby Rainey close to the vet minimum to go along with Rawls and Michael. Then draft a RB in the 2017 draft if they feel a need for an upgrade.

Largent80 · Mar 14, 2016

I wish we would draft Paul Perkins.

pcbball12 · Mar 14, 2016

Smellyman":6i2sia8j said:
pcbball12":6i2sia8j said:

kearly":6i2sia8j said:

I feel relieved that Seattle kicked the tires on Lance Dunbar but not Chris Ivory or Toby Gerhart, etc.

Maybe I'm reading into things too much, but I think the success of Thomas Rawls has caused Seattle to rethink what type of RB is ideal for Tom Cable's system. Namely, the undersized, elusive, super quick, pretty fast RB who adds "spark" to the offense. Seattle isn't looking for the next Marshawn Lynch anymore. They are looking for the next Warrick Dunn (which is what I think Rawls is going to be, health permitting).

So even if they don't sign Dunbar, I think Seattle's interest in Dunbar is interesting and probably encouraging. It shows that Seattle is willing to adapt quickly to new types of players that will succeed in Seattle's scheme.

Click to expand...

Kearly, can you explain your comparison of Rawls and Dunn? While I don't like the comparison myself, I am curious as to why that is your comparison as I respect your opinion.

To me, while Rawls has great feet and cutting ability he is also very physical (what Seattle wants in a lead back). While he can make guys miss and does with great cuts, he also looks for contact and to run over guys. He is short, but also listed at 215 so the overall frame on him is totally a workhorse type of body built for taking hits. I am struggling to come up with a comparison of my own, maybe Mark Ingram? Similar build (both weigh 215) and I believe their combine results were easily similar.

In regard to Dunbar, I have liked him for a few years now but he has had some terrible luck with injuries. If he could just get through a whole season healthy he would probably be considered one of the better change of pace backs in the game. This will make him nice and cheap though. I believe they are looking to add a COP/3rd down back via free agency or draft this year and wait until next year's loaded RB class to get another workhorse type to pair with Rawls.

Click to expand...

Rawls is like Doug Martin to me.

That is a comparison that I like.

ivotuk · Mar 14, 2016

7. Speed demon
Pro scouts Matt Berry of the Seahawks (far left), Mean Joe Greene of the Steelers (2nd from left) and C.O. Brocato of the Titans (seated, blue jacket) time Lance Dunbar as he runs the 40 along with other scouts during Pro Day at UNT's Apogee Stadium Tuesday March 13, 2012, in Denton. photo by al key/dr-c

It's a fact that Dunbar is one of the fastest guys on the team, but is he the fastest? He said he was in 2014, but when timed over 20 yards he actually lost in a race to cornerback Sterling Moore. Dunbar maintained he was still faster than Moore. "I know he's not (faster than me)," Dunbar said. "I've seen him run before." For the record, Dunbar wasn't invited to the combine but ran a 4.47 40-yard dash at his pro day.

http://sportsday.dallasnews.com/dallas- ... ne-katrina

Hasselbeck · Mar 14, 2016

bjornanderson21":39ncbs6z said:
Not interested in giving decent money to anyone who isn't likely to win the job over Rawls.

Michael showed enough in his "last chance" to be brought back on a cheap deal, if possible.

Otherwise just look for someone in the draft that fits what they're looking for. Even a mid-late round pick can come in as the backup or 3rd string easily.

Keep it cheap.

I'd take Michael back too, but a one year deal for another vet RB isn't a bad thing.

Hasselbeck · Mar 14, 2016

kearly":dmcjkwyc said:
I feel relieved that Seattle kicked the tires on Lance Dunbar but not Chris Ivory or Toby Gerhart, etc.

Maybe I'm reading into things too much, but I think the success of Thomas Rawls has caused Seattle to rethink what type of RB is ideal for Tom Cable's system. Namely, the undersized, elusive, super quick, pretty fast RB who adds "spark" to the offense. Seattle isn't looking for the next Marshawn Lynch anymore. They are looking for the next Warrick Dunn (which is what I think Rawls is going to be, health permitting).

I see Rawls to be a very similar back to what Maurice Jones-Drew was when he first entered the league. If you recall there was a period where MJD was one of the top RB's in the game. I see a lot of similarities in the two backs. In fact they're roughly the same size as Rawls is 5-9, 215 and MJD was 5-7, 215.

Dunn always struck me to be closer to a scat back than a powerful runner in a small frame like Rawls.

Lance Dunbar visiting Hawks

Well-known member

New member

New member

New member

New member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Well-known member

New member

New member

Similar threads