Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Disagree here -- he just got traded and by all accounts he isn't exactly a quick study. I think that he's likely a wasted pick if you're in a short bench league where you'll need to make a decision in a month when bye weeks start to hit. I wouldn't expect much until the second half of the season, personally, and thus see him as a redraft option only if you have very deep benches. For me, most of his value is as a deep dynasty lottery ticket.
It's been about blocking more than picking up the offense. Fred Jackson is a great pass blocker, it's as simple as that. Keep in mind the Seahawks tend to rotate in a pass blocker/catcher on obvious passing situations so it may not have been about knowing the offense as still being able to trust him in passing downs. Just like has been postulated before on who (between Turbin and Michael) would get early down work.
I'm more on the Pro-side, but agree here. It's going to take a while for Michael's chance. How many people dropped CJA last year before he blew up? Or OBJ?
Reports have come out since Sea traded him and they say it was about more than just blocking. They state his blocking, consistency and ball security where all issues. As I understand it, the consistency part was largely about the playbook, understanding his role and responsibility. The RB coach rambled about his ball security more than anything. Either way, it wasn't just a blocking thing.biju said:
Yeah I would say CMike is hanging on by the skin of his teeth as far as any roster additions.
#4.
It's telling re: Dallas' thoughts on Randle, McFadden, and / or Dunbar. It doesn't really say much of anything about Michael himself other than they were willing to take a cheap flyer.
At least they're moving in the right direction. A little over a year ago he was = Peterson, better than Lynch, a sure thing, the best overall player (not just RB) in his draft class, etc.
That is the NY Post's spin. It is very possible that Garrett not naming a starter has no linkage to Michael, or to seeing him in practice.
Actually, no there isn't. Sea has had a dominant run blocking line as well. http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/ol2014
Rob Phillips No one's saying Michael will be a 300-carry guy. Saying he can eventually add to the rotation they're establishing.
Based on those stats it appears they are highly driven by being stuffed at the line, getting to the second level, etc. You do realize they have Marshawn right? That Wilson runs the ball off the right end for big gains untouched? That they have just two of their O-line from last year in the same spot?
No doubt. The real question is how much, if any, does what Seattle knows about Michael matter to us now that he's in Dallas?
I never saw any of those blockbuster deals in my leagues that I can recall. His original price was usually a late 1st-early 2nd in the rookie draft, and since the guys who drafted him tended to be big believers, they never made him available for less than that. The idea that people all over the place were paying obscene prices for him is something that his detractors often bring up, but that certainly wasn't the reality in any of my leagues. I don't know what his value peaked at on sites like FBG and DLF. It would be nice if they made historical data available so you could check stuff like this, but I'd guess that ~RB18-20 was the high water mark, and he may yet hit that again. Certainly will if he wins the job and thrives this year.
Did you even read the article? It clearly says QB numbers are NOT included. So, your Wilson runs off the right side don't matter. The power ranking is the only that does.. Which they explain why. The stuff has no more relevance than the other categories.
True. One concern I have with Randle (one of them) is that say he does well in almost everything.... He still doesn't strike me as a great short yardage or goal line back, no matter how well he does behind that line. Same goes for McFadden. I could see Dallas using Michael in that role to start and maybe that was one primary purpose in getting him (aside from insurance and depth which they mentioned). Regardless of how the season goes for Randle, I could see that being one specific purpose the Cowboys had in mind. If and when he gets in I think that's where we'll see him first.
I doubt it but ... If Michael is active this week it says a lot about what the Cowboys saw in his few practices.
EBF can spout as much anecdotal evidence to the contrary as he wants -- but a quick search of the dynasty trade threads on here, as well as startup ADP from during the brief Lynch holdout will give you the true picture of where his value was a little over a year ago. EBF personally had him at RB6 despite the back-pedaling now.
This is how I'm interpreting the situation... which admittedly doesn't mean a hill of beans.
I can rank a guy at RB1, but that doesn't mean I ever paid that price for him. I never paid anything close to RB6 prices for Michael. That's not backpedaling. It's a fact. I listed above the only leagues where I've ever owned him. If you see a price there that equates to RB6, let me know. I never saw anyone in my leagues pay anything close to RB6 prices for Michael. AFAIK that was never his market value. Personally, most of the offers that I've sent over the years were "nibbles" that tried to get him without giving up anything too precious in return. I think I've offered random naked draft picks for him and I know I offered Larry Fitz straight up at one point. Not exactly earth-shattering overpays.
