PvP Poll CJ Prosise 1/17/17

[ericanadian]

I'm wondering if converting WRs to RB is going to be the new trend with the success of DJ, Montgomery and potentially Prosise. If you're looking for a pass catching back, why not just convert a receiver?

I find the Rawls argument funny for a few reasons:

1) Is Rawls any less injury prone than Prosise? We're working off small samples in both cases, but it seems unreasonable to judge one and not the other.
2) The line was garbage and Rawls was coming off an injury. Hard to make blanket statements on his talent based on that.

I like either guy as a high ceiling investment, but neither has a great floor.

[chopping mall]

I guess what I'm saying is if he plays a full slate of games, I project he will be around that number. I'm not saying that 60 is his floor and I'm not saying it's his ceiling either. I'm saying I project him to catch around 4 balls a game and I could easily see it being more.

Well, I'll say this, if I even remotely believed that Prosise would average 4 receptions a game as a floor, then yeah I'd gladly pay 1.03 for him.

You say you see it around 4 catches a ball, that's saying a 4 catch average, that's 64 receptions. When you say you could easily see it being more, then you're at least saying you don't see it being less than a 4 catch average. 64 catches a year as a floor. So yes that IS what you are saying.

I just want it to be a 60 catch floor is what we label a bullish prediction not a conservative one. Anyways community consensus agrees right now, no way a 60 catch floor goes only for a 2nd.

[Madadamus]

I guess what I'm saying is if he plays a full slate of games, I project he will be around that number. I'm not saying that 60 is his floor and I'm not saying it's his ceiling either. I'm saying I project him to catch around 4 balls a game and I could easily see it being more.

Well, I'll say this, if I even remotely believed that Prosise would average 4 receptions a game as a floor, then yeah I'd gladly pay 1.03 for him.

You say you see it around 4 catches a ball, that's saying a 4 catch average, that's 64 receptions. When you say you could easily see it being more, then you're at least saying you don't see it being less than a 4 catch average. 64 catches a year as a floor. So yes that IS what you are saying.

I just want it to be a 60 catch floor is what we label a bullish prediction not a conservative one. Anyways community consensus agrees right now, no way a 60 catch floor goes only for a 2nd.

So you would pay the 1.03 for Theo Riddick? I'm not saying this guy is going to rush 250+ times and catch 60-70 balls, he's not David Johnson.

And again, I never said 60 was his floor.

[chopping mall]

I guess what I'm saying is if he plays a full slate of games, I project he will be around that number. I'm not saying that 60 is his floor and I'm not saying it's his ceiling either. I'm saying I project him to catch around 4 balls a game and I could easily see it being more.

Well, I'll say this, if I even remotely believed that Prosise would average 4 receptions a game as a floor, then yeah I'd gladly pay 1.03 for him.

You say you see it around 4 catches a ball, that's saying a 4 catch average, that's 64 receptions. When you say you could easily see it being more, then you're at least saying you don't see it being less than a 4 catch average. 64 catches a year as a floor. So yes that IS what you are saying.

I just want it to be a 60 catch floor is what we label a bullish prediction not a conservative one. Anyways community consensus agrees right now, no way a 60 catch floor goes only for a 2nd.

So you would pay the 1.03 for Theo Riddick? I'm not saying this guy is going to rush 250+ times and catch 60-70 balls, he's not David Johnson.

And again, I never said 60 was his floor.

Ok lets do this another way, what do you consider a reasonable floor for Prosise in catches per game at this point? 3?

[Madadamus]

Ok lets do this another way, what do you consider a reasonable floor for Prosise in catches per game at this point? 3?

Yeah that sounds about right.

[Sterling Archer]

You do realize that even at 3 receptions a game you are approaching 50 receptions? I don't think it's crazy to predict that a pass catching back, which is what they drafted him to do, to catch 4 passes a game is an aggressive number at all. He was sparsely used and only had 1 game where he was the work horse.

While I might not have any "data" to suggest he will catch 60 balls, I can use common sense and read into what Pete Carroll is trying to do. Marshawn Lynch was never the best pass catcher out of the backfield. You don't think that organization has seen other teams successfully get their running backs in space and want to implement that into their offense? As I said, their offensive line is pretty bad so they can use short passes as an extension of their running game.

Prosise caught 17 balls in the 6 games he was active for which over a full season is over 40 balls. Take into account that in two of those games he came out in the first half due to injury, and a couple of them he wasn't starting, I think 60 balls is a conservative number.

I don't have much to add to what Sirettx said, but you also omitted that in the only 4 fully healthy games Prosise played, Rawls was on the IR. Had Rawls been healthy, Prosise likely would've had even fewer snaps. One could argue that Christine Michael's fall from grace while Rawls was hurt was the only reason Prosise got the snaps he did.

I disagree on the last statement. I do understand that Prosise and Rawls never really were on the field together, but Michael was increasingly ineffective and Prosise took over as a rookie with very limited experience. Michael knew that system, and he worked all off-season as the main back because Prosise and Rawls were hurt and after Prosise returned from his hand injury, it only took him 2 games to virtually split even with Michael. He eventually took over the following 3 games and in his final game, Rawls was active and Prosise started and played the entire first quarter before splitting drives in the 2nd quarter with Rawls before getting injured.

I'm not saying Prosise is going to be a Matt Forte and catch 80-90 balls, but I don't see why he can't catch 60 in that growing offense. I guess will find out in about a year.

In response to the top portion of your quote:
It's not crazy to predict a pass catching back to catch 4 balls per game, but given that only two RBs in the entire NFL did that this past year and both were workhorse RBs and not specialists, it is safe to say that it is extremely optimistic and highly unlikely that an oft-injured specialist would catch 4 passes per game. So basically, if you were using common sense (as you claim) you would bet against him catching 4 passes a game. Just because something is theoretically possible does not make it conservative or even likely.

Do you watch football? Marshawn Lynch was lauded as a complete 3 down back out of college for a reason. He was not only an excellent blocker, but also had excellent hands and moves after the catch. To say Lynch was never the best catching back out of the backfield is a terrible display of ignorance. Just because Turbin caught some passes doesn't mean he was better than Lynch. During his career with Seattle Lynch was in fact the best catching RB on the team. The Seattle offense during that time just didn't employ a lot of passes to the RB, but when they did, Lynch did quite well with them (career 73% catch rate and 7.9 ypr).

In response to your quote to me:
You say you disagree with it, but you echo what I said. Yes, Prosise did start to get some of Michael's touches - which is what I meant by "Michael's fall from grace". Carroll released Michael a few games later. This was more a case of Michael losing the coaching staff's favor than Prosise earning reps. However, Prosise did not "take over the following 3 games" as you say because Prosise only got more than 4 carries in one single game.

If you "don't see why he can't catch 60 passes" then you aren't looking. I'd say statistically there is probably a 95% chance he catches less than 60 and a 5% chance he catches 60+. And that might be optimistic. Again, the fact that only workhorse RBs who play 3 downs and get the bulk of the snaps caught over 60 passes last year is the first sign that it is unlikely. James White could give you hope, but he was in the unique situation of playing on one of only 5 teams that targeted RBs more than 125 times and Blount received only 8 of them. I doubt Seattle throws that many times to the RB and I guarantee Rawls gets more than 8 targets. But really the largest concern should be that Prosise is made of glass. I'd say there's less than a 20% chance he plays 16 games next year.

You need to put down the bottle of Prosise Kool-aid. I am not a fan of Rawls and I thought Prosise looked good last year, but let's be realistic - Prosise is a high risk option. We don't have enough data on him, he's still learning the position, he can't stay healthy, and the coaching staff really likes Rawls. If you can find a sucker willing to give you a 1st round pick for him, take it immediately.

[Madadamus]

My point is that I think Seattle is trying to make a change to throw to their backs more, that's why they drafted him. If you don't think they can start throwing 90+ times to their backs, that's where we just disagree. They see the success of teams like the Patriots and the Saints and wanted to replicate that, that's my opinion, it's not based on fact.

As I said already, over a full season he would have caught 42.5 and he barely played in most of those games. James White and Theo Riddick would have surpassed that "60" threshold. White hit 60 and Lewis was active for almost half the season. Riddick hit 53 and would have been on track for over 80. So no, it's not unrealistic for a pass catching running back to hit 60+ if the one caveat is that he plays a full season. And I do agree, that's probably unlikely as it is for most running backs to play all 16 games.

My statement about Lynch was that he wasn't as shifty in space like Charles or Forte were catching out of the backfield. He's not that type of guy, he's much larger and he was still extremely elusive for his size. I'm not trying to knock on Lynch, the dude was an athletic freak at his size. I'm saying Prosise is a different player. He's a speed guy with great hands and they will get him the ball because they believe he can be a playmaker and he's a natural receiver.

[GridironGuerilla]

Don't think about it, pull the trigger. The '18 draft is pretty damn well stocked. Getting an '18 1st (a moderately high one at that) and Prosise for a late '17 1st is a great deal.

I ended up taking the deal and also swapped a 2017 4th for a 3rd on top of it.

[Jfever]

Who in the Heck is thinking that they'd give an early to mid 1st for Prosise? Seriously, state your case.

I'd like to know who is voting that way and precisely why please.

[Jfever]

Oh, Lynch was "much larger" than Forte? Huh.... I was under the impression that Forte was / is taller and heavier than Lynch.

Man... a lot of misinformation rooted in ownership bias being thrown around lately. I looked it up. Lynch actually is about 20lb heavier than Charles but a few lbs less than Forte.

[Madadamus]

Oh, Lynch was "much larger" than Forte? Huh.... I was under the impression that Forte was / is taller and heavier than Lynch.

Man... a lot of misinformation rooted in ownership bias being thrown around lately. I looked it up. Lynch actually is about 20lb heavier than Charles but a few lbs less than Forte.

I'm generalizing, so my fault. I have them around around the same but Lynch is 3 inches shorter, so that's why I make that generalization.

Plus, I'd be shocked if Lynch was playing at 215 in his last couple of years.

[dlf_jules]

For context, here's all RB seasons from 2014 to 2016 with at least 10 games played and at least 3.75 receptions per game (a 60-catch pace).

60-catch pace.PNG (59.5 KiB) Viewed 461 times

[Sterling Archer]

My point is that I think Seattle is trying to make a change to throw to their backs more, that's why they drafted him. If you don't think they can start throwing 90+ times to their backs, that's where we just disagree. They see the success of teams like the Patriots and the Saints and wanted to replicate that, that's my opinion, it's not based on fact.

As I said already, over a full season he would have caught 42.5 and he barely played in most of those games. James White and Theo Riddick would have surpassed that "60" threshold. White hit 60 and Lewis was active for almost half the season. Riddick hit 53 and would have been on track for over 80. So no, it's not unrealistic for a pass catching running back to hit 60+ if the one caveat is that he plays a full season. And I do agree, that's probably unlikely as it is for most running backs to play all 16 games.

My statement about Lynch was that he wasn't as shifty in space like Charles or Forte were catching out of the backfield. He's not that type of guy, he's much larger and he was still extremely elusive for his size. I'm not trying to knock on Lynch, the dude was an athletic freak at his size. I'm saying Prosise is a different player. He's a speed guy with great hands and they will get him the ball because they believe he can be a playmaker and he's a natural receiver.

I 100% agree Seattle is making a shift towards throwing to their backs more, but I still think he's got no more than a 5% chance of catching 60 passes or more. I also agree there will be 90+ total RB targets (although nowhere near 125). Where we disagree is that 85+ of them will go to Prosise (he'd need 85-90 to get 60 catches). So yes, it is still unrealistic to expect 60. When you can only give two examples of specialists who would've hit 60 receptions if they both stayed healthy then you should get the hint that expecting this unproven, fragile, inexperienced RB to be the third is very unrealistic. Do you think he's better than Duke? Duke didn't even get 60 receptions and he's a proven, capable, healthy RB playing in a Hugh Jackson offense. Do you think he's better than Gio? Gio has never accomplished 60 receptions in his 4 year career. Getting the point now? 60 is not conservative. 60 is silly optimistic. Is there a feasible, remotely possible scenario where he does catch 60? Yes. Is it likely? Hell no.

Sorry, you should just stop talking about Lynch. You're digging a hole. First you said he wasn't the best pass catching RB on the team, which was absolutely wrong. Now you're saying Prosise is a speed guy, implying he is faster than Lynch was. Guess what? Lynch ran a 4.46 at the combine. Prosise ran a 4.48. Anything Prosise can do, Lynch could do better.

I get it. You invested in Prosise and are looking for some confirmation bias so you're dropping some hype hoping to hear other people agree. And surely you'll find other people in the same boat who want to start a bandwagon, but do yourself a favor and be realistic. If you can find another person who buys the hype, sell him.

[Sterling Archer]

Who in the Heck is thinking that they'd give an early to mid 1st for Prosise? Seriously, state your case.

I'd like to know who is voting that way and precisely why please.

My guess is people who already own him and are trying to pump him up. Nobody in their right mind would trade a 1st for this guy, much less an early to mid 1st.

[GridironGuerilla]

Nobody in their right mind would trade a 1st for this guy...

I'm not trying to pick a fight here, I'm just curious why this would be the case when he was going with a late 1st/early 2nd in rookie drafts in 2016 and certainly didn't do anything to depreciate in value? I understand the inflated value of those picks in 2017 but "nobody in their right mind" would trade a (late) 1st for this guy" is a bit of a stretch don't you think? 42 out of 64 of your peers put his value at a late 1st to an early 2nd. Are they all out of their minds?