Christine Michael (2 Viewers)

[FreeBaGeL]

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.

There is a big difference between perceived value and numbers on a piece of paper. You seem to be approaching this with the idea that he's currently RB23 and since the most he can possibly move up is to RB1, that's "only" 22 spots.

Those 22 spots are huge. The difference between RB23 and a top RB in terms of their actual value is massive.

Paying a lot for a guy that's not currently in a position to produce is always risky, but to say there's no upside here is wrong. Even if Lynch were to miss one game and Michael came in and looked good in his stead his value would balloon and you could instantly trade him at two times the price. Not even to mention what would happen if he came in for half a season or if Seattle cut Lynch at the end of the year.

 

[lbouchard]

His ADP in new leagues might only be RB23 but I think that in established leagues, it is much higher. Across most of my leagues and on other boards, he's being valued as a RB1 in my experience.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

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.

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).

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.

I've already said it before in this thread, but if you're going to try to talk about odds then I think you need to find a way to:

- Identify players who were drafted into similarly bad situations (i.e. a team that already had a mega productive RB in his prime).

- Identify players with similar talent level compared with Michael (based on draft slot, physical tools, and college production).

I just mentioned Toby Gerhart, Bernard Pierce, Ben Tate and Knile Davis along with a few other names here not long ago. It sucks for sure, but it does happen.

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.

Shah brigning the knowledge

 

[ShaHBucks]

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.

There is a big difference between perceived value and numbers on a piece of paper. You seem to be approaching this with the idea that he's currently RB23 and since the most he can possibly move up is to RB1, that's "only" 22 spots.

Those 22 spots are huge. The difference between RB23 and a top RB in terms of their actual value is massive.

Paying a lot for a guy that's not currently in a position to produce is always risky, but to say there's no upside here is wrong. Even if Lynch were to miss one game and Michael came in and looked good in his stead his value would balloon and you could instantly trade him at two times the price. Not even to mention what would happen if he came in for half a season or if Seattle cut Lynch at the end of the year.

That's still a speculative stance. You can't always bank on HUGE returns like being the top FF back. If you temper your expectations a bit there isn't much to gain at that price to me. Why wait a year when I can get the production now? I would need top tier production in the future for that price.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

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.

There is a big difference between perceived value and numbers on a piece of paper. You seem to be approaching this with the idea that he's currently RB23 and since the most he can possibly move up is to RB1, that's "only" 22 spots.

Those 22 spots are huge. The difference between RB23 and a top RB in terms of their actual value is massive.

Paying a lot for a guy that's not currently in a position to produce is always risky, but to say there's no upside here is wrong. Even if Lynch were to miss one game and Michael came in and looked good in his stead his value would balloon and you could instantly trade him at two times the price. Not even to mention what would happen if he came in for half a season or if Seattle cut Lynch at the end of the year.

That's still a speculative stance. You can't always bank on HUGE returns like being the top FF back. If you temper your expectations a bit there isn't much to gain at that price to me. Why wait a year when I can get the production now? I would need top tier production in the future for that price.

That's a bit of a different stance from saying there aren't returns to be had. Not to mention that I disagree with you that you have to bank on huge returns. As I mentioned, Michael is in a unique position in that all you need is one good game or stretch out of him to get a big return on your investment. One good game out of him and his "high" value will boost to "mega super duper" value immediately. This is somewhat similar to Cordarrelle Patterson's big boost in value from last year to this despite him showing only a few flashes on the field.

A stat like "he's already valued in the top 20% of players" isn't really a useful metric. Top 20% compared to what? The Buffalo defense and Jordan Todman? Top 20% isn't some significant cutoff. Lamar Miller and Knowshon Moreno fall in that range.

 

[EBF]

That's a bit of a different stance from saying there aren't returns to be had. Not to mention that I disagree with you that you have to bank on huge returns. As I mentioned, Michael is in a unique position in that all you need is one good game or stretch out of him to get a big return on your investment. One good game out of him and his "high" value will boost to "mega super duper" value immediately. This is somewhat similar to Cordarrelle Patterson's big boost in value from last year to this despite him showing only a few flashes on the field.
A stat like "he's already valued in the top 20% of players" isn't really a useful metric. Top 20% compared to what? The Buffalo defense and Jordan Todman? Top 20% isn't some significant cutoff. Lamar Miller and Knowshon Moreno fall in that range.

The idea that he has little room to move up is just a really bizarre argument when you see where Lacy/Bernard/Bell are ranked without necessarily proving much more beyond that they can be the big fish in a small pond on teams that have no other viable RB options.

This thread is proof that there are still a lot of doubters out there. 4-5 good games in the starting role would turn a lot of those doubters into converts and suddenly he'd go from being a player who's highly-coveted by 2-3 owners per league to being someone that almost everyone would pay a fortune for.

 

[JPeso]

His ADP in new leagues might only be RB23 but I think that in established leagues, it is much higher. Across most of my leagues and on other boards, he's being valued as a RB1 in my experience.

And this is why start-up matters not in established leagues. No one who drafted Michael last year is dealing him anywhere near RB23.

Whether he can develop in to a three-down back will determine whether or not he can ever be considered RB1 in dynasty. Luckily crazy-high TD totals will off-set the likelihood he catches "only" 40 passes per year.

He's the most talented pure runner since AP.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The idea that he has little room to move up is just a really bizarre argument when you see where Lacy/Bernard/Bell are ranked without necessarily proving much more beyond that they can be the big fish in a small pond on teams that have no other viable RB options.

I know this a popular narrative for you, but it's disingenuous to say that's all they did, no matter how many hundreds of times you say it. There have been plenty of players with opportunity that never did anything with it. Outside of Bell, who's ypc wasn't spectacular (but explainable), it wasn't like the three were pure volume backs either. Bell, in fact, had a very high yard per catch average and was very effective in the passing game.

There's also a cost associated with acquiring production, something each of those guys offer for 2014 which Michael does not (barring injury to Lynch, which is of course possible).

At this point, while even allowing for the arguement that it's likely, there is no guarantee that Lynch is gone in 2015 either. There's a possibility that he even agrees to take a paycut to stay in Seattle if he sees a soft market, and the team is still winning.

So now we are faced with a possibility that Michael doesn't get a chance at a full time job until 2016 - a season where he turns 26. Just glancing at this board for more than five minutes and you'll see that many in the fantasy community start discounting RBs at age 26 - a view I find silly, but it surely happens - so his value, on the trade market, may never climb higher than it is right now.

There really isn't any guarantee that his value ever increases from where it is now - I know that isn't countering the exact point you are making (since "yes", Lynch could suffer an injury and Michael's value would increase before even taking a snap as soon as this season).

That's why it isn't unreasonable to state he's a sell high now - if I owned him I doubt I would, but it's also one of the reasons I'd be hesitent to pay some of the absurd prices his owners demand.

 

[JPeso]

The idea that he has little room to move up is just a really bizarre argument when you see where Lacy/Bernard/Bell are ranked without necessarily proving much more beyond that they can be the big fish in a small pond on teams that have no other viable RB options.

That's why it isn't unreasonable to state he's a sell high now - if I owned him I doubt I would, but it's also one of the reasons I'd be hesitent to pay some of the absurd prices his owners demand.

Certainly not unreasonable, but you also cannot be frustrated when his owners want the "absurd" prices they demand. Just take a look at this guy.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

The idea that he has little room to move up is just a really bizarre argument when you see where Lacy/Bernard/Bell are ranked without necessarily proving much more beyond that they can be the big fish in a small pond on teams that have no other viable RB options.

That's why it isn't unreasonable to state he's a sell high now - if I owned him I doubt I would, but it's also one of the reasons I'd be hesitent to pay some of the absurd prices his owners demand.

Certainly not unreasonable, but you also cannot be frustrated when his owners want the "absurd" prices they demand. Just take a look at this guy.

No I do understand that, as indicated in the first half of my sentence you quoted.

 

[EBF]

There really isn't any guarantee that his value ever increases from where it is now - I know that isn't countering the exact point you are making (since "yes", Lynch could suffer an injury and Michael's value would increase before even taking a snap as soon as this season).
That's why it isn't unreasonable to state he's a sell high now - if I owned him I doubt I would, but it's also one of the reasons I'd be hesitent to pay some of the absurd prices his owners demand.

Well, you just explained why he isn't a 1st-2nd round startup pick. If there were no risk, he would not be as cheap as he is. Everyone knows there is risk. That's why nobody that I've seen is paying top 15 startup value for him, even if that's what some of his current owners are demanding.

I won't get into the Lacy/Bernard/Bell thing any further beyond just saying that people pay a premium for opportunity and immediate results. Maybe too much of a premium. I actually think that unit as a whole is egregiously overrated at their market price compared to Michael, although it's a valid point that Michael's "true" market price is a lot higher in many leagues than the extremely timid rankings you see from the market consensus.

There is no telling exactly what will happen, but if Michael continues to show great promise then the Seattle RB situation might become less about what Marshawn Lynch wants and more about what Pete Carroll and his staff want. They presumably drafted Michael because they think he can be the replacement for Lynch as their starting RB, so if they think he's ready to take the next step then they might decide that it's time to move on from Lynch. Not unlike what happened with Rodgers/Favre in Green Bay and Luck/Peyton in Indianapolis. At some point it becomes less about what the player wants and more about what the team wants.

My guess is one more year of Lynch with Michael mixed in. Then Michael in 2015. But yes, nobody KNOWS for sure. That's why his market price represents a compromise between the most optimistic scenarios and the most pessimistic. It's slanted towards optimism overall and I think that's appropriate.

 

[ShaHBucks]

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.

There is a big difference between perceived value and numbers on a piece of paper. You seem to be approaching this with the idea that he's currently RB23 and since the most he can possibly move up is to RB1, that's "only" 22 spots.

Those 22 spots are huge. The difference between RB23 and a top RB in terms of their actual value is massive.

Paying a lot for a guy that's not currently in a position to produce is always risky, but to say there's no upside here is wrong. Even if Lynch were to miss one game and Michael came in and looked good in his stead his value would balloon and you could instantly trade him at two times the price. Not even to mention what would happen if he came in for half a season or if Seattle cut Lynch at the end of the year.

That's still a speculative stance. You can't always bank on HUGE returns like being the top FF back. If you temper your expectations a bit there isn't much to gain at that price to me. Why wait a year when I can get the production now? I would need top tier production in the future for that price.

That's a bit of a different stance from saying there aren't returns to be had. Not to mention that I disagree with you that you have to bank on huge returns. As I mentioned, Michael is in a unique position in that all you need is one good game or stretch out of him to get a big return on your investment. One good game out of him and his "high" value will boost to "mega super duper" value immediately. This is somewhat similar to Cordarrelle Patterson's big boost in value from last year to this despite him showing only a few flashes on the field.

A stat like "he's already valued in the top 20% of players" isn't really a useful metric. Top 20% compared to what? The Buffalo defense and Jordan Todman? Top 20% isn't some significant cutoff. Lamar Miller and Knowshon Moreno fall in that range.

That's what you said, not me. And I didn't make up the 80/20 rule so don't take that out on me. lol I don't see where you're going with Buf, Todman, ect... If you're refering to players drafted in the same range as Michael, I don't want to open pandoras box here. I mainly draft players based on the value they bring to my team (definitly in rounds 5-6, because I still trying to win the league!), not gambling that a a players stock will go up in price because somebody else will pay even more for it. There is a difference, especially when chasing a 'hot' name. If you want to play that game, it not always foolproof. Last season I drafted T. Austin just to move him based on what I percieved as hype that exceeded his true value(what he actually adds to your team). That worked out great. At a certain point in a few drafts this year I took Maziel on the same basis. However, you can get caught holding the bag. If Manziel looks bad in the preseason, I'm left holding a potential flameout. Even if it works out it's gambling. Any decision to roster a player outside of what he's actually worth to your team should be considered as such.

If Michael was going in the range of other high upside backup RBs I be here hi-five'n you every week. I'd login to MFL and just to stare at his name on MY roster. Then I'm coming tothe sharkpool to let you know how great I am at FF. He's not though. At a RB 23 pricetag I'll just go and draft a guy that will actually finish in the top-15 while getting backups with the same upside, in the same situation days later. If there comes a time where his value drops then I'll be there with a few offers.

 

[SayWhat?]

If Michael was going in the range of other high upside backup RBs I be here hi-five'n you every week. I'd login to MFL and just to stare at his name on MY roster. Then I'm coming tothe sharkpool to let you know how great I am at FF. He's not though. At a RB 23 pricetag I'll just go and draft a guy that will actually finish in the top-15 while getting backups with the same upside, in the same situation days later. If there comes a time where his value drops then I'll be there with a few offers.

I'm extremely curious who these RB's are, that in a dynasty league you'd rather have at ~RB20 for immediate production over someone with the upside of Michael? Ridley? Bush? Chris Johnson? Gerhart? Ben Tate?

IMO, Michael has an eerily similar vibe to a relatively unproven that I gambled on in the 4th round of a start-up a ways back named Larry Johnson. He was priced far beyond what he had proven just as Michael is, but a year later he was basically the consensus overall #1 dynasty player. I'm not saying that'll be the case for Michael, but it's not out of the question. It is out of the question for the RB's ranked in the 20's that you feel will actually finish in the top 15 of RB's near-term. If you trust your talent evaluation and aren't afraid to take a bit of a risk that Michael will net you nothing, the payoff is potentially enormous. If you can't stomach the thought of taking someone whom hasn't "proven it on the field" then you're stuck with middling talent/situation/age types like those listed above.

 

[Tito the Builder]

I am verry much waiting Larry Seely's projections.

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Bevell: "We are going to be running back by committee. We really like what Christine Michael is doing right now."

 

[EBF]

Bevell: "We are going to be running back by committee. We really like what Christine Michael is doing right now."

Looks like that tweet came from an ESPN NFL reporter who covers the Seahawks. Guy has 12k followers, so probably isn't just some clown:

Terry Blount ‏@TerryBlountESPN 1h

Bevell on Christine Michael: "He's somebody we're really excited about. He has breakaway speed and power behind his pads."

Terry Blount ‏@TerryBlountESPN 49m

Bevell: "We are going to be running back by committee. We really like what Christine Michael is doing right now."

Hype train about to hit the warp drive.

 

[Milkman]

OMG please happen this year. He could be good enough behind that line to save my team.

 

[bumpman]

Bevell: "We are going to be running back by committee. We really like what Christine Michael is doing right now."

Looks like that tweet came from an ESPN NFL reporter who covers the Seahawks. Guy has 12k followers, so probably isn't just some clown:

Terry Blount ‏@TerryBlountESPN 1h

Bevell on Christine Michael: "He's somebody we're really excited about. He has breakaway speed and power behind his pads."

Terry Blount ‏@TerryBlountESPN 49m

Bevell: "We are going to be running back by committee. We really like what Christine Michael is doing right now."

Hype train about to hit the warp drive.

There was a live Seahawks town hall at 6:30 pm PST. Haven't watched it, but wouldn't be surprised if the interview of Bevell in that is where this quote came from.

http://www.seahawks.com/videos-photos/live.html

 

[LususV]

Like Spiller "run til he pukes", I'll believe it when I see it. Plans are plans until a guy misses a key block or fumbles in preseason.

I'm a long-term buyer, but I'll be cautious in redraft.

 

[werdnoynek]

Like Spiller "run til he pukes", I'll believe it when I see it. Plans are plans until a guy misses a key block or fumbles in preseason.

I'm a long-term buyer, but I'll be cautious in redraft.

Like Spiller? Yes please. Redraft and Dynasty. He doesn't need 300 carries to be a productive fantasy back.

 

[Faust]

Darrell Bevell: Seahawks going to RB 'committee'

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000356154/article/darrell-bevell-seahawks-going-to-rb-committee

 

[fridayfrenzy]

Bevell said it in the town hall presentation with fans. Wouldn't be surprised if it was a get your butt to OTAs jab at Lynch.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Bevell said it in the town hall presentation with fans. Wouldn't be surprised if it was a get your butt to OTAs jab at Lynch.

I read that Bevell is the one that Lynch was flipping off in the middle of a game.

 

[Gandalf]

Well this is good news for all us CM believers.

 

[zed2283]

Wow, this thread is about to blow up even more.

 

[Phenix]

LOL, people will believe anything. Especially in June at Town Halls.

 

[tdmills]

Bevell: "We are going to be running back by committee. We really like what Christine Michael is doing right now."

Looks like that tweet came from an ESPN NFL reporter who covers the Seahawks. Guy has 12k followers, so probably isn't just some clown:

Terry Blount ‏@TerryBlountESPN 1h

Bevell on Christine Michael: "He's somebody we're really excited about. He has breakaway speed and power behind his pads."

Terry Blount ‏@TerryBlountESPN 49m

Bevell: "We are going to be running back by committee. We really like what Christine Michael is doing right now."

Hype train about to hit the warp drive.

Haha or Michael will get some carries and be active this year. Not that he will be the man. If he gets between 50-100 carries, is that going to change much?

 

[Phenix]

Bevell said it in the town hall presentation with fans. Wouldn't be surprised if it was a get your butt to OTAs jab at Lynch.

I would think so, but Lynch is all about that action and threats wont motivate him.

People are going to try to low ball on Lynch hard now as this June rumor.

I have learned ever listen to what a Coach, OC or player says about personel in June.

 

[gianmarco]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

 

[Phenix]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

Because this is just June OTA noise and fluff that some owners will take as fact.

Plus Rotoworld is in love with Michael and they have been one of the main sites pounding him as a soon to be stud.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps?

It's a mystery.

 

[GreenBaySnackers]

High 5 to the rest of the Michael owners on here, this guy is going to be great!

 

[gianmarco]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

Because this is just June OTA noise and fluff that some owners will take as fact.

Plus Rotoworld is in love with Michael and they have been one of the main sites pounding him as a soon to be stud.

Even though I know better than to respond to you, so what you're saying is that this is just noise and fluff and that Turbin is still the primary backup and Michael is 3rd on the depth chart?

 

[MAC_32]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

Because the veteran was given the nod as the backup until the former rookie developed.

The former rookie is developing and if that continues he will pass the less talented veteran on the depth chart.

 

[spreagle]

Kaepernick contract means Russell Wilson also gets a big contract which also means its tougher to keep Lynch. Bump Michael.

 

[Phenix]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

Because this is just June OTA noise and fluff that some owners will take as fact.

Plus Rotoworld is in love with Michael and they have been one of the main sites pounding him as a soon to be stud.

Even though I know better than to respond to you, so what you're saying is that this is just noise and fluff and that Turbin is still the primary backup and Michael is 3rd on the depth chart?

Appreciate the attitude but I was backing your point.

What I'm saying is it's June 5th and Rotoworld loves Michael. I thought I couldnt be any clearer except for the exact date.

Turbin is 2nd on the depth chart even on the one listed at Rotoworld. I think Michael could be a good RB but I'm not on this hype train like some here. Especially at the expense of Lynch.

 

[gianmarco]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

Because the veteran was given the nod as the backup until the former rookie developed.

The former rookie is developing and if that continues he will pass the less talented veteran on the depth chart.

I'm guessing you couldn't tell there was a bit of sarcasm in that post of mine.

 

[Dismattle]

Bevell said Christine Michael has become better at the “details” of being a running back. Bevell even hinted a more of running-back-by-committee approach this season. as per http://blog.thenewstribune.com/seahawks/2014/06/04/a-few-notes-from-the-seahawks-town-hall-event/#more-25636

Personally Im not always so faithful to "depth charts", which can involve some If/ else type jargon. I also think its wise to consider how a journalist or even a Coach/Guru could spin a story w a preference for one player.

But when you hear things like "running w the ones", its probably time to take notice (imho). Obviously this was reported via the absence of Beast-mode..

fwiw > Bevell also said Doug Baldwin will move to the X and Percy Harvin will be the Z. He said Baldwin will play inside at times, too. Bevell also noted they like what they have seen from Sidney Rice thus far.

Read more here: http://blog.thenewstribune.com/seahawks/2014/06/04/a-few-notes-from-the-seahawks-town-hall-event/#more-25636#storylink=cpy

 

[MAC_32]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

Because the veteran was given the nod as the backup until the former rookie developed.

The former rookie is developing and if that continues he will pass the less talented veteran on the depth chart.

I'm guessing you couldn't tell there was a bit of sarcasm in that post of mine.

Sorry, I checked out of this thread when it was obvious the Turbin crowd wouldn't get it. I have no idea who is/was pro Michael and who is/was not.

Michael may or may not develop, but how the Turbin crowd could not see this possibility made me want to reach through my computer screen and smack them.

 

[mvereb]

Writing is on the wall: This is the best time to 'sell high' on C-Mike in dynasty and 'buy low' on Marshawn in redraft.

 

[ex-ghost]

Lynch's contract runs through 2015. Looks like he has a $2M signing bonus in 2015. He'll be 29 this time next year. What are the chances this is his last year in Seattle?

My guess is that CM gets more carries so that he takes over as the lead back in 2015 and Lynch is given the "thanks for the memories, good luck wherever you land".

 

[karmarooster]

Lynch's contract runs through 2015. Looks like he has a $2M signing bonus in 2015. He'll be 29 this time next year. What are the chances this is his last year in Seattle?

My guess is that CM gets more carries so that he takes over as the lead back in 2015 and Lynch is given the "thanks for the memories, good luck wherever you land".

I think this is the likely scenario. 100% chance Lynch is either gone in 2015 or restructures. I'd put the changes at around 70% he's gone, 30% he restructures and sticks around.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

Because the veteran was given the nod as the backup until the former rookie developed.The former rookie is developing and if that continues he will pass the less talented veteran on the depth chart.

I'm guessing you couldn't tell there was a bit of sarcasm in that post of mine.

Sorry, I checked out of this thread when it was obvious the Turbin crowd wouldn't get it. I have no idea who is/was pro Michael and who is/was not.Michael may or may not develop, but how the Turbin crowd could not see this possibility made me want to reach through my computer screen and smack them.

There is no "Turbin crowd." There's definitely a "Michael crowd," and a crowd of "ehh we'll see how things shake out" types. But I have yet to see anyone going all in on Turbin anywhere.

 

[MAC_32]

Writing is on the wall: This is the best time to 'sell high' on C-Mike in dynasty and 'buy low' on Marshawn in redraft.

Agree on the latter, but I'm not following you on the former. What sort of offers will the Michael crowd get? What they paid for him last year?

 

[MAC_32]

I thought Michael was 3rd on the depth chart and Turbin ahead of him? Why aren't they talking about Turbin being in a RBBC or taking 1st team reps? I seem to remember that being a big argument against Michael very recently that he couldn't beat him out.

Because the veteran was given the nod as the backup until the former rookie developed.The former rookie is developing and if that continues he will pass the less talented veteran on the depth chart.

I'm guessing you couldn't tell there was a bit of sarcasm in that post of mine.

Sorry, I checked out of this thread when it was obvious the Turbin crowd wouldn't get it. I have no idea who is/was pro Michael and who is/was not.Michael may or may not develop, but how the Turbin crowd could not see this possibility made me want to reach through my computer screen and smack them.

There is no "Turbin crowd." There's definitely a "Michael crowd," and a crowd of "ehh we'll see how things shake out" types. But I have yet to see anyone going all in on Turbin anywhere.

Maybe it was more anti Michael than pro Turbin, it's been a few months so memory isn't the sharpest.

 

[FUBAR]

Bevell said it in the town hall presentation with fans. Wouldn't be surprised if it was a get your butt to OTAs jab at Lynch.

I would think so, but Lynch is all about that action and threats wont motivate him.

People are going to try to low ball on Lynch hard now as this June rumor.

I have learned ever listen to what a Coach, OC or player says about personel in June.

Just got Lynch in a dyno auction, probably would have been a little cheaper if this had popped a few days ago. But now I'm bidding on Michael and thinking I won't get him as I won't overpay.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Writing is on the wall: This is the best time to 'sell high' on C-Mike in dynasty and 'buy low' on Marshawn in redraft.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Writing is on the wall: This is the best time to 'sell high' on C-Mike in dynasty and 'buy low' on Marshawn in redraft.

Agree on the latter, but I'm not following you on the former. What sort of offers will the Michael crowd get? What they paid for him last year?

Run a search in the trade thread -- you might be surprised. Assuming the typical late rookie 1st last year acquisition cost, there's a great chance at strong ROI on him in the current market.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

At this point you just take your chances IMO. If he doesn't pan out, so be it. Career VBD is exponential and Michael's got a decent chance of power up some impressive totals over the next five years.

People really need to rethink "draft position" as being one thing. All "2nd round picks" are not the same. Draft position is about both talent and risk.

And, since career VBD is exponential, a 50/50 chance of landing a true stud or drafting a complete bust is worth alot more than a 100% chance you've just landed the next Alfred Morris.

Buying risk-laden talent is a winning bet in the long run.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

At this point you just take your chances IMO. If he doesn't pan out, so be it. Career VBD is exponential and Michael's got a decent chance of power up some impressive totals over the next five years.

People really need to rethink "draft position" as being one thing. All "2nd round picks" are not the same. Draft position is about both talent and risk.

And, since career VBD is exponential, a 50/50 chance of landing a true stud or drafting a complete bust is worth alot more than a 100% chance you've just landed the next Alfred Morris.

Buying risk-laden talent is a winning bet in the long run.

Depends on the cost. I'm a big fan of making safe, strong (+) ROI moves in general -- the payoff potential individually obviously isn't as high, but over the long haul those smaller sure gains can easily add up into being a massive crushing advantage. This year, guys like Michael and Patterson offer the type of quick safe ROI I usually take advantage of. I like both guys as players, and I'm not at all saying either on is a must sell or anything, but there are people WAY higher than I am on both guys in pretty much every league out there, I'd imagine. When I can turn a late 1st round rookie pick and one year's roster spot into RB / WR1 value, while letting someone else take on more risk, I'll do that all day.