Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Christine Michael (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Black
- Start date
- Status
EBF
Footballguy
Don't know how accurate this stuff is, but DLF's May ADP has him at RB19.
http://dynastyleaguefootball.com/adpdata/?month=5
I'd still say he's free money at that price.
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
DropKick
Footballguy
Where do you see him being drafted? Let's not confuse dynasty (where age is a huge factor) to normal rankings.
Not sure what people don't like about him... rare physical attributes and the size/speed to be a feature back. The first round of my rookie/free agent drafts are still dominated by RBs. With the exception of Sankey, this year's top rookie RBs went to teams with competition. Hill with Bernard; Hyde with Gore, Latimore, etc. Mason with Stacey. Does Hyde have a better "opportunity" than Michael? Even with the nice WR crop, Michael would be a legitimate pick in this first round.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
At RB ~18 off the board in dynasty startups who are you really passing on at this point?
steveski
Footballguy
I took Ryan Mathews and then Sankey and Michael went right after. Might regret it in the long run, but the RB game is always dicey and didn't want to risk an unknown as my RB2.
Sorry for ruining your circle jerk everyone. Carry on.
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
EBF
Footballguy
Hah, yeah. Apparently the games just keep getting tougher. I used to play live a little bit around 2004-2005, but was always a big time bankroll nit. Started to play a lot of tourneys around 2009-2010, but got burned out and then Black Friday happened, so don't play much anymore. I was actually in Vegas last week though and got in a couple hours of low stress 3-6 LHE at the Mirage. Very fishy loose/weak table. Wasn't hard to spot the sucker there. Walked away with a MASSIVE $12 profit, but it was nice just to play again. I'm not exactly Phil Ivey, but bss's comment was funny since I'm up big lifetime both live and online in cards.
Back to the actual topic at hand. If RB18-RB19 is really market value for Michael then like I said he's free money at that cost. If you're paying RB5 prices then it's a different story, but I don't see that in my leagues. Seems the anti-Michael crowd is arguing against a fanaticism that just doesn't exist.
Louche
Footballguy
I traded away the 1.16 for C-Mike while I was on the clock in one of the Paragon leagues the other day. The other owner took Jeremy Hill at 1.16 (pre news of Hill running with the 2s yesterday). Latimer, Manziel and Moncrief were also available. I feel pretty good about that price.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Warpig
Footballguy
I just picked up Michael in a startup 16 tm ppr/idp auction with a $133 million cap (simulates NFL) as a RB#4 (40 man active rosters). He's the 28th highest paid RB at $5,200,00. In comparison, Shady is at $20,000,000 and Jamaal Charles is at $17,500,000 (top two paid RBs). He's my 2nd highest paid RB behind Toby Gerhart at 6.7 million and ahead of aging vets like Gore and S-Jax. He was a hot commodity at the point in the auction he was nominated. Fortunately I had the most cap space available and I won him.
I'm all in on his potential. May burn me down the road.
I'm all in on his potential. May burn me down the road.
az_prof
Footballguy
I just watched this video from 2013 preseason. It features Michael, Turbin and Ware. I honestly don't see much more talent, if any, between Turbin and Michael. Turbin is going against first teamers mostly and Micahel against third and second teamers. I am not convinced from this that Michael is special.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzprXP6mkyk
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzprXP6mkyk
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Until Michael does something, he's seahulk's caddy.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
I do think Turbin gets dismissed way too easily by the Michael contingent. It's surely possible that Michael would be the back that Seattle turned to if Lynch was injured or suspended, but I'm not sure it's such a given.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
the Christine Michael love reminds me of Jonathan Stewart love. Except that Stewart produced something and had a lesser talent in front of him.Dr. Octopus said:
bicycle_seat_sniffer
Smells like chicken
EBF
Footballguy
Injuries prevented him from having a great college career and becoming a 1st round draft pick. To me, the durability risk was factored into his NFL draft slot. Without those injuries, he would've been a much higher draft pick and consequently he'd be rated a lot higher in FF. So to me it's largely a moot point.
It's kind of like saying Colt Lyerla has character issues. Yes, he does. That's why he went undrafted and that's why his market price is nowhere near guys like Ebron and ASJ. Clearly the character issues are factored into his price. So merely saying that he has character issues isn't an interesting observation on its own. It would only be interesting if you were arguing that the discount warranted by his character issues is more or less than what the market is applying.
DLF staff rankings have Michael at RB23. If you take out the one ultra-pessimistic outlier, he jumps up to RB21.
There's actually a lot of downside factored into that ranking. If anything, it strikes me as an overly conservative ranking. Consider that fellow 2nd round picks Bernard, Lacy, and Bell are ranked 3, 5, and 6 after one season in which their NFL performance ranged anywhere from slightly below average to good depending on your frame of reference. That is a big, big gap between them and Michael. Even if you assume that he's only 35-50% likely to ever achieve their current perceived market value, RB21 would probably be a fair ranking or maybe even too timid.
A lot of the anti-Michael crowd on here postures as if people are treating Michael like some sort of can't-miss lock superstar, but that's just not the case. His market price has never been anywhere close to what people like Bush, Peterson, and Richardson were pulling before their rookie years.
EastonBlues22
Footballguy
Hyde seems like a reasonable value comparison at this point. A year apart in age, drafted into similar offenses, and investors both know there's probably at least another year waiting period before they'll see any significant playing time. Neither is objectively the only game in town with Lattimore/Hunter and Turbin/Ware also hanging around, but both are likely to see the biggest value surge on their roster when Gore/Lynch moves on. Hyde is the safer play given his circumstances (Gore's age, Lattimore's injury) and profile (more well-rounded skill set, no off-the-field concerns), but I personally think Michael has the higher talent ceiling based on his tape and athletic profile.
That perceived additional upside might or might not balance out the additional risk (which is significant) for any given investor, but I think the value of the two should be pretty close for most people given the parallels.
Touchdown There
Footballguy
There is a one in a million chance that you are getting the thumbs up from a Steeler because you are a Steeler. This is how you are indoctrinated into the hyena pack.
karmarooster
Footballguy
Waiting for it.... new blurb on roto..... can we get a page or two of back and forth?
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
If he's a million miles ahead of where he was, he may have lapped himself a few times and actually be behind where he was. Just something to think about.
slackjawedyokel
Footballguy
Deep. Really deep... then again, I'm inspired by the conversation over in the Josh Gordon thread, so everything is deep right now. The sky is so... blue.
I find it interesting that in OTAs, Michael is getting "most of the reps with the 1s" in Lynch's absence despite the fact that Turbin is participating in the OTAs as well.
http://blog.seattlepi.com/football/2014/06/02/seahawks-ota-notes-super-bowl-winners-look-motivated/#23921101=0
"With Lynch away, Christine Michael took most of the reps with the No. 1 offense. Last week, Carroll praised Michael’s development and said that the 2013 second-round pick would get a lot of work in the lead-up to the 2014 season."
"Wilson and the rest of the Seahawks quarterbacks weren’t particularly sharp on Monday, but their receivers did them few favors. Robert Turbin, Anthony McCoy and Kiero Small — none of whom are wideouts — each had balls go off of their hands, while Matthews — who according to Wilson had a great session Friday — dropped two, including one that would have been a 50-yard touchdown."
http://blog.seattlepi.com/football/2014/06/02/seahawks-ota-notes-super-bowl-winners-look-motivated/#23921101=0
"With Lynch away, Christine Michael took most of the reps with the No. 1 offense. Last week, Carroll praised Michael’s development and said that the 2013 second-round pick would get a lot of work in the lead-up to the 2014 season."
"Wilson and the rest of the Seahawks quarterbacks weren’t particularly sharp on Monday, but their receivers did them few favors. Robert Turbin, Anthony McCoy and Kiero Small — none of whom are wideouts — each had balls go off of their hands, while Matthews — who according to Wilson had a great session Friday — dropped two, including one that would have been a 50-yard touchdown."
EBF
Footballguy
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
How about this....
....this is STUPENDOUS news for Michael.
Anyone ignoring this total change of the team willingness (which has to coincide with reports of Michaels change in readiness) is missing the boat on the teams 180 in this sittuation.
Very interesting to see what this could lead to for 2014 prospects.
Neofight
Footballguy
Bronx Bomber
Footballguy
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
Just got my free article in http://rotoviz.com/index.php/2014/06/christine-michael-the-redwood-hot-tub-of-trade-chips/
The part about Ben Tate is interesting even though it's been said a million times already.
EBF
Footballguy
The article skews negative overall and I don't really agree with one of the major points:
This is one of the main arguments the doubters have raised in this thread and it's simply not true.
Here's how Michael compares to some of his fellow 2013 rookie backs according to three different "market value" gauges:
PLAYER NAME ----- DLF Staff Ranking ----- DLF May ADP Ranking ----- DFWC May Draft ADP
Eddie Lacy - 11 - 10 - 10
Gio Bernard - 12 - 10 - 12
LeVeon Bell - 21 - 15 - 17
Christine Michael - 62 - 61 - 60
The idea that he has minimal upside at his current market price doesn't really hold up to scrutiny when you look at the numbers and see that he's going 45-50 spots below several guys from his draft class. You can draw a parallel between him and Justin Hunter, who has a similar ADP/ranking across the board. Regardless of whether you think these players are going to succeed or fail, it's pretty clear that there's a potentially large profit margin in the event that they turn out to be legit. When your analysis totally misses this huge glaring selling point of these players, it's hard to take seriously. Michael isn't cheap right now and neither is Hunter, but buying high doesn't necessarily = buying at peak.
Last edited by a moderator:
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
I didn't say I agree with him or anything, especially from a talent standpoint, there was just some reasonable points physiologically.
Lacy, Ball, Bell and Stacy (Michael's peers) are starting RBs. Michael is a doughnut on your bench from week-to-week. DFL has him ranked as the 23rd dynasty RB. Given that it'll cost you a pretty penny to aquire him, I don't see as much margin for profit as you think to mitigate the risk.
EBF
Footballguy
If he's starting and producing, he could be a consensus top 5 dynasty RB in another year or two. A nice upside from RB23.
Look at how high Lacy/Bernard/Bell are ranked and consider that their rushing effectiveness was not that spectacular last season. Now consider what the hype would be like if they had posted a Chris Johnson/Adrian Peterson/Clinton Portis type of rookie year where they not only compiled stats through volume, but actually made a dynamic impact running the ball. That's the upside of Michael. He could not only be worth as much as those guys, but he could actually be worth even more.
There are credible arguments for why Michael will never reach an elite market value. However, there is NO credible argument that a player who's ranked RB23 and 60th overall doesn't have much room to improve in value. It's a totally asinine position. Essentially the same as saying, "Justin Hunter cannot become much more valuable than he is right now." Whether or not you think he will get there, you'd have to admit that IF he posts 70 catches for 1300 yards and 10 TDs this season, he'll be worth exponentially more than he is right now. Same deal with Michael. If he's currently valued as a 5th-6th round startup pick in a 12 team league then obviously there's still a lot of room for his value to grow (because he could theoretically become a 1st-2nd round pick in the future).
The "little room for his value to improve" argument would actually be a lot more valid against guys like Patterson, Hopkins, Evans, or Watkins who are going much higher in drafts and have less room to move up the rankings as a result. That same argument used against Michael doesn't really work since he's not being treated like an elite asset (or even close).
Biabreakable
Footballguy
The article is playing devils advocate to those who may not be entirely confident of Michael being able to perform at a high level if/when he does get the opportunity to play. Which I do think he will get some opportunity this season.
This is why the comparison is made to Ben Tate as a possible outcome. As pointed out Tate has some pretty elite athleticism, much like Michael. He was also in a favorable system (Kubiak/Shanahan ZBS) like Michael is.
Part of the reason that Tate is not as highly valued as he once was, is because when he got the opportunity to play he did not perform up to the high expectations people had for him. He got injured and missed opportunity because of that, which caused more doubt about his durability, the ability to take advantage of opportunity.
This has not happened to Michael yet, and maybe it never will. However as pointed out in the article, Michael has missed time in college, with minor injuries and due to disciplinary measures. So that should at least be a concern for people in regards to Michael. A yellow flag as Faust described it earlier on in the thread. There is some evidence from Michaels history that he has missed games. So if that happens in the NFL as it did with Tate, that could cause some of Michaels percieved value to drop.
For now until he plays, the potential is sky high, people can envision him becoming a RB1. If he comes in and is not that impressive, or gets dinged and misses some time. Some of that shine will fade away.
It is somewhat similar to what we see with the value of rookie picks. A pick is pure potential that could become anything. Up until the point that you use that pick on a player, when the picks value becomes a bit more tangible. So the value of the pick peaks until the moment you actually use it. Similarly with Michael the potential is peaking now. Once he plays a few games people will be able to better quantify how valuable he is, but not before then.
That said I agree with your point that Michaels value has not peaked yet. As you illustrate with the ADP on the other 2nd year RB who did get the opportunity to perform last season. As a RB prospect I like Michaels upside better than most of those players (I still prefer Bernard). But I also can see several ways that he might fail. Injury/character/Lynch being the main concerns that could keep Michael from reaching his potential.
Some may be more concerned about that, than I am. Some are less concerned about those risks or perhaps unaware/unconcerned about them at all.
It reads a bit like a trade proposal you might get talking a player down before they make an offer for the guy. Which of course usually gets the reaction of "if this guy is such a bum why do you want to trade for him?".
I think those 3 concerns, Injury/character/Lynch are real. So if a Michael owner is able to sell him at this point for a similarly valuable but more stable asset? Maybe they should do that and sleep better at night not having to worry if Michael will pay off or not.
I think you keep him if you believe he will perform as a RB1 once he gets the opportunity.
This is why the comparison is made to Ben Tate as a possible outcome. As pointed out Tate has some pretty elite athleticism, much like Michael. He was also in a favorable system (Kubiak/Shanahan ZBS) like Michael is.
Part of the reason that Tate is not as highly valued as he once was, is because when he got the opportunity to play he did not perform up to the high expectations people had for him. He got injured and missed opportunity because of that, which caused more doubt about his durability, the ability to take advantage of opportunity.
This has not happened to Michael yet, and maybe it never will. However as pointed out in the article, Michael has missed time in college, with minor injuries and due to disciplinary measures. So that should at least be a concern for people in regards to Michael. A yellow flag as Faust described it earlier on in the thread. There is some evidence from Michaels history that he has missed games. So if that happens in the NFL as it did with Tate, that could cause some of Michaels percieved value to drop.
For now until he plays, the potential is sky high, people can envision him becoming a RB1. If he comes in and is not that impressive, or gets dinged and misses some time. Some of that shine will fade away.
It is somewhat similar to what we see with the value of rookie picks. A pick is pure potential that could become anything. Up until the point that you use that pick on a player, when the picks value becomes a bit more tangible. So the value of the pick peaks until the moment you actually use it. Similarly with Michael the potential is peaking now. Once he plays a few games people will be able to better quantify how valuable he is, but not before then.
That said I agree with your point that Michaels value has not peaked yet. As you illustrate with the ADP on the other 2nd year RB who did get the opportunity to perform last season. As a RB prospect I like Michaels upside better than most of those players (I still prefer Bernard). But I also can see several ways that he might fail. Injury/character/Lynch being the main concerns that could keep Michael from reaching his potential.
Some may be more concerned about that, than I am. Some are less concerned about those risks or perhaps unaware/unconcerned about them at all.
It reads a bit like a trade proposal you might get talking a player down before they make an offer for the guy. Which of course usually gets the reaction of "if this guy is such a bum why do you want to trade for him?".
I think those 3 concerns, Injury/character/Lynch are real. So if a Michael owner is able to sell him at this point for a similarly valuable but more stable asset? Maybe they should do that and sleep better at night not having to worry if Michael will pay off or not.
I think you keep him if you believe he will perform as a RB1 once he gets the opportunity.
ROYALWITCHEESE
Footballguy
The problem is, despite those rankings, he is not being bought and sold at those prices. He is being bought and sold at top 15-20 RB prices for proven commodities. I think that is what the author is getting at. If you can sell him at a top 15 RB price, you should do it. Because he hasn't really played yet and could be worse than RB15 when he finally is a starter.
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
I don't think that was the point of the article. A basic startup can go 25 rounds with 12 teams, for example. That's 300 players drafted. If Michael is 60th, he is valued as a player in the top 20% of the pool. A dollar today > a dollar tomorrow. He goes ahead of players like Gerhart, who we both believe he could produce top-15 numbers for a year or so. Where is the magin of safety in making a critical decision like that? And what's elite value? Top 10-15% of players? There isn't much room for an ordinary return or a significant loss. You're pretty much banking on him being extraordinary in the future since he doesn't have any present value. That's not a 'cheap' price to pay relative to other high upside backup RBs and other starting RBs. I asked about that before here somewhat.
Reading the artilcle made me question is the difference trying to be the coolest kid in the class. You can take Michaels name out of the article and there is still a few points to be raised. Just recently Michael's name was Ben Tate. That's undeniable.
The article was about Michaels trade value though. I actually think his peak will be when he's announced the starter FWIW. The bidding war will be crazy then. I'd move him then to free myself of any losses ad let someone else worry about his past creeping up. But, that isn't the minset of a investor. That's called speculating.
ShaHBucks
Footballguy
Same here. I was told he's untouchable.
- Status
