two dog":325ya38j said:
My regard for Tyler Ervin is documented in several posts but I was somewhat surprised
that Henry's 10 yd. split was just 4/100ths less than that of Ervin despite a 55 lb. difference in
their weight.
Good thoughts. I agree with McGruff, most of the players you like will probably at least be on Seattle's radar, including Henry.
Regarding the quoted text, I would say there is an important distinction between a 1.56 and 1.61 split. It may only look like a .05 second difference, but if you rank all draftable halfbacks and assign them a percentile based on their 10 yard split the past several years, Henry is probably ~25th percentile and Ervin is probably ~70th percentile. Henry's 4.54 40 time would probably be 50th percentile while Ervin's 4.39 would probably be about 85th percentile (I'm estimating on these numbers).
Basically, one RB is poor to average and the other is very good to elite in those areas. And that's not even getting into field speed which Ervin has an insane amount of. Ervin feels more explosive than Christine Michael on tape (Michael's ten yard split was 1.49) and has C2k in his prime exhibitions of speed.
The problem with Henry isn't just what he can't do, it's that what he can do well doesn't really mesh with Seattle's apparent strengths. Henry needs a very specific type of environment to have success, and it's not only Seahawks fans that are saying this. Countless analysts have mentioned this, most recently X's and O's guru
Greg Cosell.
Cosell compares Derrick Henry to DeMarco Murray. Putting aside that this is a very generous comparison (Murray ran a 4.41 with a 1.55 split), it is useful because even for as talented as Murray is, we have seen first hand evidence of how drastically his results changed when he moved from Dallas to Philadelphia. Did Philadelphia expose Murray to be a fraud of a RB? Not at all. It simply underscored the need for the right RB to be in the right system.
Henry was a beast at Alabama because he was the epitome of an Alabama RB. He fit their system like a glove. If you could replicate that system, with a bunch of badass offensive lineman and a highly effective inline blocking scheme, with full backs and tight ends making major contributions in the run game, basically a team like Dallas in 2014 or SF from 2011-2013, then Henry will end up being just as good for that team as he was for Alabama.
It's nothing against Henry, but Seattle is not even remotely close to being that team. Our TEs mostly suck at blocking. Our fullbacks have been mediocre and are both currently free agents. Our offensive line was on pace to be historically bad in the first half of last season before going to spread looks. Even with Marshawn Lynch at RB, our inline running game was terrible. Basically, the last thing we want is to return to inline power football, until there is a dramatic improvement in blocking personnel.
That's why I'm against the pick. It's not so much a knock against Henry. I think he could be great for the right team. I just think Seattle is the worst case scenario for him and vice-versa, especially if it forces Seattle into more inline blocking looks which were so disastrous in 2015.
Of course, PC/JS do not always agree with me, and I think for Pete the idea of being the big bully on the block is really hard for him to let go of. Also, there is a very slight concern on the existing roster about power running, as both Rawls and Michael were mediocre in obvious rush situations last year. If Henry falls far enough, I think he becomes a person of interest for Seattle, even though, in my opinion, he should not be.