Field Gulls on Kenneth Walker III
From the article
It's natural to look at what Kenneth Walker is doing in Kansas City and decide Seattle should have simply kept him. But that would mean evaluating the decision entirely through its current result... Walker's talent was never really the question. The concern was whether he could stay healthy and consistently handle a larger workload.
STACKED’s take
Walker's KC success doesn't invalidate Seattle's durability-based decision to let him walk.
Walker signed a three-year, $43.05 million deal with Kansas City and is now producing with more responsibility. However, the offseason decision to let him walk was based on durability concerns and his inability to consistently handle a larger workload in Seattle, where backfield sharing was part of roster construction. The current production in Kansas City cannot be used to retroactively judge Seattle's process, because Schneider could not have known during the offseason whether Walker would stay healthy and produce at this level. If Walker stays healthy throughout the season, Seattle's decision will naturally look different, but that's hindsight evaluation rather than process evaluation.
Kenneth Walker IIIRB · KCPlayer page — value, ADP, projections, and every insight