Pick a dynasty RB - Lattimore, Michael, or Richardson (1 Viewer)

[Jrodicus]

Just curious everyone's thoughts at the moment.

Many thought that Lattimore would've been the first RB off the board in 2013 if not for his devastating injury. Owners who drafted him knew they wouldn't get a return on him for at least a year, and even then, that there was no guarantee that he'd return to form. He went to a great rushing team with an aging vet as the starter, but will have competition to become the starter when that time comes.

Michael steadily rose up the draft boards in 2013 after an impressive combine performance. Much like Lattimore, owners who drafted Michael knew that it would take time before they saw any production. He showed some flashes in preseason, but was buried at #3 on the depth chart all season (also on a great rushing team).

Richardson was a top dynasty pick in 2012 and touted by many as the next great RB. He was the unquestioned starter from day 1, showed flashes of why he was picked so high, and put up solid fantasy points (even though his YPC was low). He was traded early in the season to a new team, struggled most of the year, and put up horrible fantasy numbers.

Given the option of one of these three, which player do you pick for your dynasty team?

 

[nightmare]

3 of 4 dynasty teams-all in on Lattimore. F Gore is on one. Michael was drafted higher in 2 of the 3 drafts.

The 1st round of the draft Lattimore(1.12) went higher in was held in May. The 2nd round in June(Michael 2.04).

The 4th league was auction($250 cap), Michael $5, Lattimore $7. I didn't draft high enough 2 years ago to get Trent

in any of the leagues. Auction league in 2012 T Richardson went for $47 and A Peterson coming off of injury went for

$48-T Richardson was cut this season.

F Gore is not going to last longer then M Lynch. Lattimore is projected to be the starter. The rest of the

49ers RB's are role players. At this point I would make a low ball offer for T Richardson and wouldn't try for Michael.

Can't use up to many roster spots for "potential" on one position.

Sometimes chasing rookie potential is good but I took a chance on D Woodhead in 3 of those leagues and he helped

me get to the playoffs in 2(SB loser in 1)

 

[Sabertooth]

Initial gut is Lattimore, Michael, Richardson.

 

[MAC_32]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

 

[cstu]

Initial gut is Lattimore, Michael, Richardson.

 

[Gandalf]

I like Michael above Lattimore and Richardson. Richardson is a distant 3rd after last season.

 

[eNdblu]

Players who haven't done or shown anything other then combine numbers, or had their leg dangling by threads hold more value obviously then a player who had a bad recent season and played half their rookie season with broken ribs.

Dynasty football - where players who haven't made you look bad hold more value.

 

[Gandalf]

Players who haven't done or shown anything other then combine numbers, or had their leg dangling by threads hold more value obviously then a player who had a bad recent season and played half their rookie season with broken ribs.

Dynasty football - where players who haven't made you look bad hold more value.

I would reframe it like this... Dynasty football - where players with potential hold more value than players who busted in the nfl thus far.

 

[buck naked]

Players who haven't done or shown anything other then combine numbers, or had their leg dangling by threads hold more value obviously then a player who had a bad recent season and played half their rookie season with broken ribs.

Dynasty football - where players who haven't made you look bad hold more value.

I would reframe it like this... Dynasty football - where players with potential hold more value than players who busted in the nfl thus far.

These are two funny positions - both made me chuckle. The difference in opinion is so drastic.

Richardson hasn't "busted". His first year was pretty good for putting fantasy points on the board. Last year, he looked awful. That isn't a career "bust". This year will be the telltale year, but no doubt I can see why Cleveland traded him. At least Richardson will get a for sure opportunity.

Michael - waiting for all the talent-sitting-on-the-bench lovers to hit this thread.

This is pretty close, but I'm going with Lattimore, Richardson, Michael.

 

[Gandalf]

Richardson not a bust? His rookie year was okay from a fantasy perspective but in real life the guy got traded for a late first round pick one year after being the third pick overall. The team he got traded to then benched him for Donald Brown because he looked so bad. I'm not saying Trich can't turn things around but, in my opinion, Richardson has to be considered a bust, especially when factoring in that 'he was the best prospect since ADP.' Because of all this I would prefer Michael or Lattimore.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Michael>>>>Lattimore>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Richardson

 

[menobrown]

Richardson not a bust? His rookie year was okay from a fantasy perspective but in real life the guy got traded for a late first round pick one year after being the third pick overall.

He got traded for a first round pick, the late part was not known until later. In this day and age a first round pick for a RB is premium.

 

[Gandalf]

Funny how the Browns use their 3rd overall pick but a year later RBs are just not valuable anymore. I would argue that the Brown saw something that they didn't like in Richardson. Cleveland thought he was a bust or they never would have traded him. Then he gets to Indy and plays worse than any RB I have seen in recent memory. I mean what does a guy have to do to be a bust???

 

[travdogg]

I'm sure I'll be clearly in the minority, but I'd rank them:

Richardson

Michael

Lattimore

 

[Jrodicus]

Funny how the Browns use their 3rd overall pick but a year later RBs are just not valuable anymore. I would argue that the Brown saw something that they didn't like in Richardson. Cleveland thought he was a bust or they never would have traded him. Then he gets to Indy and plays worse than any RB I have seen in recent memory. I mean what does a guy have to do to be a bust???

How about play more than two seasons?He may end up being a bust, but I think it's too early to write the book on him.

 

[menobrown]

Funny how the Browns use their 3rd overall pick but a year later RBs are just not valuable anymore. I would argue that the Brown saw something that they didn't like in Richardson. Cleveland thought he was a bust or they never would have traded him. Then he gets to Indy and plays worse than any RB I have seen in recent memory. I mean what does a guy have to do to be a bust???

Bolded part 1: 100% different front office. The regime that traded him would never have taken him third.

Bolded part 2: He was a bust in 2013, not in 2012. I'll start considering his career a bust if he sucks next season after a full offseason/training camp and not getting suddenly traded inseason.

 

[Gandalf]

The thing is that he looked so bad in 2013. It really was awful. Like practice squad bad. Wouldn't a really good player be able to overcome that being traded mid season? I mean it's hard to pin it all on not be able to learn the playbook. As it pertains to these 3 players anyway, I am sticking with Michael, lattimore and then TRich.

 

[buck naked]

Funny how the Browns use their 3rd overall pick but a year later RBs are just not valuable anymore. I would argue that the Brown saw something that they didn't like in Richardson. Cleveland thought he was a bust or they never would have traded him. Then he gets to Indy and plays worse than any RB I have seen in recent memory. I mean what does a guy have to do to be a bust???

Nobody is arguing against how bad TRich looked last year. Indy was making excuses for him too, saying give the guy a chance through a full year of mini-camps and practices. But that one bad year does not automatically make him a career bust. I don't necessarily like his chances, but I like them more because he has a sure opportunity to me while workout warrior Michael does not.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Funny how the Browns use their 3rd overall pick but a year later RBs are just not valuable anymore. I would argue that the Brown saw something that they didn't like in Richardson. Cleveland thought he was a bust or they never would have traded him. Then he gets to Indy and plays worse than any RB I have seen in recent memory. I mean what does a guy have to do to be a bust???

Nobody is arguing against how bad TRich looked last year. Indy was making excuses for him too, saying give the guy a chance through a full year of mini-camps and practices. But that one bad year does not automatically make him a career bust. I don't necessarily like his chances, but I like them more because he has a sure opportunity to me while workout warrior Michael does not.

Why? Don't they both have to fight through better RBs to get more time? And while Michael is a backup RB, Richardson is closer to a FB.

 

[Sabertooth]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

 

[Jrodicus]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

 

[Jrodicus]

I actually think Hunter has been a good buy low for the last year. I thought he looked good pre-injury, and looks like he's fine post-injury.

I think the 49ers RB1 role post-Gore is his to lose.

 

[thriftyrocker]

He's just not good.

Just like Moreno and Donald Brown were not good.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

 

[MAC_32]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

nah, he's a dancer. He reminds me of a bigger Reggie Bush five years ago.

 

[Jrodicus]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

Who did GB, Pitt, and Cinci bring in last year to challenge their new RBs?

What a horrible memory.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

Who did GB, Pitt, and Cinci bring in last year to challenge their new RBs?

What a horrible memory.

There were plenty of players in camp.

 

[Sabertooth]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

I think any back on the roster is a threat to an ineffective Richardson. Even a undrafted rookie could emerge over him. They traded a first and look like fools for doing it. That's a sunk cost. I don't think he's given anything and if a back like Zac Stacy came in there, he'd be a threat.

 

[Sabertooth]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

Who did GB, Pitt, and Cinci bring in last year to challenge their new RBs?

What a horrible memory.

Trent isn't a new back though. He played almost a full season at a low level.

 

[Jrodicus]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

Who did GB, Pitt, and Cinci bring in last year to challenge their new RBs?What a horrible memory.

There were plenty of players in camp.

As camp bodies or legit threats to their newly acquired RBs?

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

Who did GB, Pitt, and Cinci bring in last year to challenge their new RBs?What a horrible memory.

There were plenty of players in camp.

As camp bodies or legit threats to their newly acquired RBs?

Who cares? It's like you aren't aware rosters explode during the summer. Go back and read your posts.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Jrodicus, we know that you want Richardson to be good. Everyone knows. But making a new thread on it doesn't change that he is what he is, which is a crap RB. Stop doing arguing about this.

 

[nightmare]

2013 FBG game summaries seem to show Hunter has his speed back but doesn't have the inside

the tackle power that replaces Gore. In 3 seasons has a total of THREE carries inside the 5 yard line

with a total of one TD. Hunter might be RBBC but it's Lattimore who's going to replace Gore when

they need the power stuff.

 

[Jrodicus]

Jrodicus, we know that you want Richardson to be good. Everyone knows. But making a new thread on it doesn't change that he is what he is, which is a crap RB. Stop doing arguing about this.

I think it's too early to write him off. Interpret that however you want.

 

[Jrodicus]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

Who did GB, Pitt, and Cinci bring in last year to challenge their new RBs?What a horrible memory.

There were plenty of players in camp.

As camp bodies or legit threats to their newly acquired RBs?

Who cares? It's like you aren't aware rosters explode during the summer. Go back and read your posts.

No #### rosters get bigger. I bet the Broncos even bring in some QBs. Does that mean there's a competition for Peyton's job?

Go back and read my posts. It's like you don't understand the meaning of the word "challenge."

 

[biju]

I would challenge someone saying he had a great 2012. That season is the definition of stat accumulation as a 3.6 YPA isn't going to cut it. And this year he went 2.9 YPA in IND. If he doesn't turn that around immediately he isn't going to see the field. There's a chance he learns more during the offseason with the club, but I wouldn't try to bet on that personally.

 

[nightmare]

Indy is going to bring in RB's. Richardson and Ballard are the leading guys for the starting job.

Bradshaw and Brown are FA's. Herron is more of a fullback, Choice and Rainey are JAGS.

In Dynasty T Richardson is a hold. Redraft all depends on who else comes in and how Trent

looks going against 1st teamers in preseason.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

Who did GB, Pitt, and Cinci bring in last year to challenge their new RBs?What a horrible memory.

There were plenty of players in camp.

As camp bodies or legit threats to their newly acquired RBs?

Who cares? It's like you aren't aware rosters explode during the summer. Go back and read your posts.

No #### rosters get bigger. I bet the Broncos even bring in some QBs. Does that mean there's a competition for Peyton's job?

Go back and read my posts. It's like you don't understand the meaning of the word "challenge."

Anyone could challenge Trent Richardson for his job. Are you really using the same mechanism teams use to challenge ####ty RBs like Richardson in the same way as thinking Manning could lose his job? It's like you don't understand anything. Damn ####### right Richardson could lose his job. If you think just because a team made a horrific trade (one that could be used as an example as one of the worst in the past decade) for a RB, that it means he won't lose his FB job next year, you are to an extreme.

 

[Jrodicus]

Jrodicus, we know that you want Richardson to be good. Everyone knows. But making a new thread on it doesn't change that he is what he is, which is a crap RB. Stop doing arguing about this.

I think it's too early to write him off. Interpret that however you want.

 

[Gandalf]

Trich is a hold in dynasty because he is untradeable...

 

[Jrodicus]

Richardson is the only one with an immediate opportunity. Him.

Does he? Because they don't play any games until September and adding any back, even a rookie UDFA would seem to be a threat to his opportunity. He's just not good. The other guys have upside at least. I think we've seen what Trent is. He's a plodder.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that you think the Colts will bring in a FA RB to challenge Richardson after just trading a 1st round pick to get him?

The Colts, as will every other team in the league will bring in RBs, in addition to every other position on the team to challenge their current players. What an odd question.

Who did GB, Pitt, and Cinci bring in last year to challenge their new RBs?What a horrible memory.

There were plenty of players in camp.

As camp bodies or legit threats to their newly acquired RBs?

Who cares? It's like you aren't aware rosters explode during the summer. Go back and read your posts.

No #### rosters get bigger. I bet the Broncos even bring in some QBs. Does that mean there's a competition for Peyton's job?Go back and read my posts. It's like you don't understand the meaning of the word "challenge."

Anyone could challenge Trent Richardson for his job. Are you really using the same mechanism teams use to challenge ####ty RBs like Richardson in the same way as thinking Manning could lose his job? It's like you don't understand anything. Damn ####### right Richardson could lose his job. If you think just because a team made a horrific trade (one that could be used as an example as one of the worst in the past decade) for a RB, that it means he won't lose his FB job next year, you are to an extreme.

After an in-season trade and 14 games, you're throwing that trade in the mix for worst of the last decade? Who's the one being extreme?

Somehow me trying to be the voice of reason and pump the brakes on the TRich hate makes me he biggest fan? The guy could end up being worthless, but I think it's too soon to make that call.

I wouldn't take him early in redraft, but in dynasty, I wouldn't jump ship yet if I drafted him early.

 

[Gandalf]

What other choice do you have but keep him in dynasty? Offering him as part of any deal for any good player would likely blow up the negotiation. If you have him, your only choice is too keep him.

And as it relates to this thread, if you could trade TRich for either Michael or Lattimore straight up I think you should hit accept immediately.

 

[ffgiant]

I will take in the order of Richardson, Lattimore, Michael. I have Michael rostered in my dynasty league. I felt Richardson is the one who will get repeated opportunities to prove himself.

 

[MAC_32]

I will take in the order of Richardson, Lattimore, Michael. I have Michael rostered in my dynasty league. I felt Richardson is the one who will get repeated opportunities to prove himself.

there are a lot of other holes needing patched throughout their roster. Richardson will be given every opportunity to win the job and won't be given much competition.

 

[Bronx Bomber]

He's just not good.

Just like Moreno and Donald Brown were not good.

Add Ryan Matthews to the list of prove us wrong guys.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

Trich is a hold in dynasty because he is untradeable...

He is droppable.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

After an in-season trade and 14 games, you're throwing that trade in the mix for worst of the last decade? Who's the one being extreme?

Somehow me trying to be the voice of reason and pump the brakes on the TRich hate makes me he biggest fan? The guy could end up being worthless, but I think it's too soon to make that call.

I wouldn't take him early in redraft, but in dynasty, I wouldn't jump ship yet if I drafted him early.

I don't think I'm being extreme. So far, that trade was simply horrible. I'm gonna bounce because we are just going to repeat ourselves. Godspeed Jrodicus. No hard feelings dude.

 

[Jrodicus]

After an in-season trade and 14 games, you're throwing that trade in the mix for worst of the last decade? Who's the one being extreme?

Somehow me trying to be the voice of reason and pump the brakes on the TRich hate makes me he biggest fan? The guy could end up being worthless, but I think it's too soon to make that call.

I wouldn't take him early in redraft, but in dynasty, I wouldn't jump ship yet if I drafted him early.

I don't think I'm being extreme. So far, that trade was simply horrible. I'm gonna bounce because we are just going to repeat ourselves. Godspeed Jrodicus. No hard feelings dude.

Likewise.

Haters gonna hate

 

[menobrown]

Trich is a hold in dynasty because he is untradeable...

He is droppable.

Don't know many droppable or untradeable players who have 48+ pages about them and might be one of if not the most discussed player on this board. Discussions don't go that long when everyone agrees which means there are plenty of do value him and if people value a player that makes him very tradeable.

 

[buck naked]

Trich is a hold in dynasty because he is untradeable...

He is droppable.

That's ridiculous. At least now I know I can skip over your posts.