What's new
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!

Zac Stacy vs Tre Mason (2 Viewers)

Who is the Rams RB to own in Dynasty league?

  • Zac Stacy

    Votes: 70 25.1%
  • Tre Mason

    Votes: 159 57.0%
  • Both

    Votes: 38 13.6%
  • Neither

    Votes: 12 4.3%

  • Total voters
    279
msommer said:
You started this little exercise in futility by stating that a fact was being overlooked, namely that Mason would relegate Stacy to lesser duties.
Jesus Christ, are you serious?

That was NOT the fact I was referring to.

Yes, I firmly believe that will happen, but you clearly aren't following the flow if you think that's what I meant when I said "Seems to me that fact is being overshadowed by misconception in this thread."

We were discussing who was the better pass catching back. But hey, if you want it to mean something else so you can make your point... by all means.

I'll be glad to revisit this thread at midpoint this season and see where we're at w distribution of carries.
Indeed I am serious.And no one is getting the majority of the snaps at NFL level that has not shown themselves to be at least adequate pass blockers (in the NFL).

Mason needs to do that. Stacy already has.
While I agree it is beyond essential to pass block, it is easier to teach a person to block then to run the ball with great vision, power and agility. I believe if the coaches thought Stacy did that well they wouldnt have spent an early pick on Mason.

Stacy supporters keep forgetting that.
Why did the Chiefs draft Knile Davis and the Seahawks draft C. Michael?
I'm sorry I could be confused, but Mason does not have an elite NFL back in front of him?

I also can be confused but who did the Chiefs have besides McCluster and Charles before Davis and who did the Seahawks have besides Lynch and Turbin before Charles... also how old are Charles and Lynch? Called an expensive contingency plan.

The Rams had Stacy, Pead, Cunningham and Richardson but still drafted Mason.
Richardson has since been cut, Pead is a bust, if he makes the team it will be for special teams, who knows what the team thinks of Cunningham, but I could more readily believe the Mason pick reflects more on him than Stacy, he upgrades the #2 RB spot. How many teams use more than one RB? A lot. STL may not have been confident in any RB OTHER THAN Stacy on their roster. Now they have two strong RBs with Stacy and Mason. That doesn't mean they don't value Stacy or value Mason more.

Maybe they didn't value a potential upgraded RBBC prospect enough to spend a second, but didn't think they would like the later options as much (they may have had the fourth earmarked for the safety Mo Alexander, didn't have a pick in the fifth because of trading from 44 to 41 for Joyner, and wouldn't have another pick until the sixth) and the third seemed like a sweet spot in terms of team need/BPA intersection.

 
Mason is a good player and will surely see the field. It will be some sort of a committee, no doubt.

Am happy to own both. But I am baffled that otherwise respectable and frequent posters seem to have lost all perception of reality in this specific debate. Really, Stacy sucks? The new Shonn Greene? Slow, hopeless, displaced by week 8, etc.? 22nd out of 22 backs? Have you guys been living under a rock last season? Never saw a Rams game?

Here are NFL highlights of a 5th-round back. Yeah, he is obviously terrible. No doubt will be thrown to the curbside as soon as Mason is healthy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oplKg5Brh_M

Mason will take a piece of the pie, but the tirades about how much Stacy sucks reek of ulterior motives.
Really wish those highlight clips would show some RBs blowing up a blitzing LB in pass pro. Done right, it's just as sexy as the spin move to break a big run. It would also show what Mason can't do and why his field time will be more limited than what his running skills merit.
Mason's pass protection skills has been described as everything from bad to adequate. For information Waldman is not positive on this aspect of his game. We simply don't know yet what he can do at the NFL level. He does seem to be at a disadvantage here, though.

 
There was also a bit of a run at the RB position towards the end of the top 64

54 Sankey
55 Hill
57 Hyde

69 Sims
75 Mason

94 West
96 McKinnon
97 Archer
103 Freeman
113 Andre Williams
117 Kadeem Carey
124 DeAnthony Thomas
130 James White
138 Taliaferro

181 Blue
186 Seastrunk
201 Grice
204 Gaffney
222 Johnson
227 Kiero Small (I still need to look this guy up)

Looking at the 2 tiers of RB drafted after Mason was taken I cannot say I consider them the same level of RB prospect as him. Based on how highly regarded Mason is I think he would have been the next RB taken by another team if it were not the Rams landing him at pick 75.

There are a bunch of RB who went undrafted who could do well if given the opportunity. So it is not like they had to take Mason there, but obviously they and many other people like him a lot.

The 20 pick drop after Mason shows some distance from where he was taken and the next RB. Which is not as far as the drop from Hyde to Sims (12 spots). Then you have 9 RB picks that are never 10 spots away from each other after that. So where teams are filling in after the top 5 RB were taken.

At least that is kind of how I see it from the point of view of the NFL teams based on how they used their picks.
 
There was also a bit of a run at the RB position towards the end of the top 64

54 Sankey

55 Hill

57 Hyde

69 Sims

75 Mason

94 West

96 McKinnon

97 Archer

103 Freeman

113 Andre Williams

117 Kadeem Carey

124 DeAnthony Thomas

130 James White

138 Taliaferro

181 Blue

186 Seastrunk

201 Grice

204 Gaffney

222 Johnson

227 Kiero Small (I still need to look this guy up)

Looking at the 2 tiers of RB drafted after Mason was taken I cannot say I consider them the same level of RB prospect as him. Based on how highly regarded Mason is I think he would have been the next RB taken by another team if it were not the Rams landing him at pick 75.

There are a bunch of RB who went undrafted who could do well if given the opportunity. So it is not like they had to take Mason there, but obviously they and many other people like him a lot.

The 20 pick drop after Mason shows some distance from where he was taken and the next RB. Which is not as far as the drop from Hyde to Sims (12 spots). Then you have 9 RB picks that are never 10 spots away from each other after that. So where teams are filling in after the top 5 RB were taken.

At least that is kind of how I see it from the point of view of the NFL teams based on how they used their picks.
I think a crux of the problem the Free Masons (TM :) ) are having wrapping their minds around STL using "as high" a pick as a third on a RB that may not necessarily start immediately (if ever - though I think he could eventually, just not likely as a rookie), could be related to a disconnect based on the fact that we really don't know how much the Rams value RB depth.

In other words, to some, a later pick would have made more sense to them as a depth pick, like a fourth, fifth (maybe forgetting STL didn't have one), sixth, etc. but how do we know STL doesn't value RB depth more than them, and to the Rams, using a third round pick on a RB that may be ticketed as a backup, at least for a year or possibly more, if he is a REALLY GOOD backup, may have seemed about right on the value where they took him, neither overpaying (he went about where expected, maybe a little lower) or underpaying (he wasn't going to last much longer, as noted).

If they in fact value RB depth more than some are accounting for, and they already had taken three starters filling some big needs, were sitting in the third round looking ahead a round or two (like in chess, or calculating the leave after a bank in a game of pool, and in fact thinking ahead on the best shot SEQUENCE to string shots together), maybe having a log jam with the fourth round pick, not being able to take safety Alexander AND a RB, and without another pick again until the sixth, and given the arguable drop at the position after Mason (lower graded RBs like West and Williams among the next drafted) you noted, that third round spot may have seemed like a GREAT one to take a RB. Even one that may not be an immediate starter.

On the bonus plan, they may have more intel on Mason as a person (Fisher's son was on the team), and they are in the unusual position where Mason actually followed 1.2 pick Robinson's blocks at Auburn, and they are familiar with each other on the field.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
What funny about 3rd round picks is that if it was a player a person liked prior to the draft being taken in the 3rd is considered a "high" pick. If it's a player they didn't like prior to the draft it's a "low" pick.

 
What funny about 3rd round picks is that if it was a player a person liked prior to the draft being taken in the 3rd is considered a "high" pick. If it's a player they didn't like prior to the draft it's a "low" pick.
He's in a draft range that produced these RB's.
There are two factors that must be taken into consideration when looking at the historical list that you linked to...

1) The devaluation of the RB position by NFL GMs.

2) The depth of the 2014 draft (could be the deepest ever).

Taking the above two points into consideration the Rams may have gotten the best RB to ever be drafted between the 71st and 75th pick. Picks in this range for this draft might actually be yielding 2nd round value in a normal year...

 
You bring up an interesting point about how much Jeff Fisher and the Rams front office might value a back up/potential starting RB.

We can assess this by looking at the draft history connected to Jeff Fisher.

2014 75 Tre Mason

2013 160 Zac Stacy

2012 50 Isaiah Pead 252 Daryl Richardson

2010 None They had 25 year old Chris Johnson entering his 3rd season after his 2k yards season.

2009 173 Javon Ringer

2008 24 Chris Johnson

2007 50 Chris Henry

2006 45 LenDale White 246 Quinton Ganther

2005 142 Damien Nash

2004 191 Troy Fleming

2003 93 Chris Brown

2002 None

2001 192 Dan Alexander

2000 213 Mike Green

1999-1997 None

1996 14 Eddie George

1995 89 Rodney Thomas

1994 129 Sean Jackson

Eddie George was a very special player as we see from the Titans not drafting any RB for 3 consecutive years after he established himself as their starter. They did not really address the position until George's career was nearing the end.

Then you see 3rd round pick Chris Brown but free agents like Travis Henry were brought in as well to take over for George.

3 2nd round RB Pead, White and Henry were given opportunity but busted.

3 3rd round RB Thomas and Brown were a mixed bag. Thomas was replaced by George. Brown got the opportunity to be their feature RB but struggled with injuries IIRC and was not outstanding as a starter, merely ok.

Given the history you should be hoping for a Chris Brown opportunity for Tre Mason to be the feature RB and you will be looking over your shoulder if an even higher pick is used on a RB in the future.

Fisher does not highly value a back up RB based on this in my opinion. What he does is invest some pretty high picks at the position if he does not have an established RB like George or Johnson were.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Fisher was HC in HOU/TEN for 16 years and has been in STL for three years. One question I've had is how much influence GM Floyd Reese had prior to being forced out in TEN (possibly in part over control of the draft) and how much Snead has in STL.

One prevalent pre-draft meme that I disagreed with was "Fisher doesn't draft OL in the first round", because he inherited Bruce Matthews and Brad Hopkins in HOU. Not only did they draft Robinson at 1.2, they reportedly were ready to trade their 2014 second and third and a 2015 second to BAL, if DAL hadn't taken Zach Martin the pick before. In which case, probably no Mason. To me, that is potential evidence undermining the narrative that STL felt an urgent need to replace Stacy as the starter because they think he is terrible.

There was another school of thought I disagreed with, that STL wouldn't draft Donald because Fisher prefers big DTs (like Brockers and Haynesworth), and he would be a poor scheme fit. That may seem laughable in retrospect (with near consensus that he "completes" what was already one of best DLs and most dangerous pass rushes in the game, adding his ferocious interior pressure to that of Quinn and Long on the edge, and Brockers inside run stuffing presence), but some believed it at the time. I thought if you can't find a fit in your scheme for a transcendent talent like Donald, there is something wrong with the scheme.

Sometimes what appears to be the weight of history is actually just an accretion of happenstance (not always, of course, Bill Polian favored Big 10 DBs with high picks in the early-mid 2000s, taking safeties Mike Doss and Bob Sanders with second round picks in 2003 and 2004, and CBs Marlin Jackson and Kelvin Hayden with first and second round picks in 2005, respectively).

As others have said, Mason wasn't drafted because Stacy is old. So by process of elimination, he was drafted to provide depth, complement or replace him. Maybe they wouldn't have used a pick as "high" as a third on a RB for any reason other than the express purpose of taking Stacy's job sooner than later, but I don't think that is the only possible interpretation for the Mason selection.

Fisher and/or Snead in post-draft interviews made it sound like there wasn't a master plan to take a RB, it was more a case of Mason being too good to pass up at that juncture on a BPA basis in their estimation (which I can believe, as I thought he was one of the top RBs in the class, before the draft).

Maybe they aren't necessarily down on Stacy, and think Mason has the kind of talent to POSSIBLY seize the starting job in the future. If that doesn't materialize or transpire, but he becomes one of the better non-starting RBs in the NFL, imo, using a third round still will have been well worth it, as he can spell Stacy as well as provide valuable injury insurance. If Mason does prevail as the primary ball carrier, and Stacy ends up as one of the better non-starting RBs in the league, I think they would be fine with that, too. Perhaps the way things unfold and shake out, they both turn out to be good, for different but complementary reasons, and the future RBBC split is approximately even. One issue with splitting carries is it can prevent either RB from getting into a rhythm, but if STL makes a concerted effort to get primordial and pound the rock (like SF and SEA), there could be plenty of carries to go around for both, with some games enabling one to get 20 carries and the other 15 carries. I'm not sure if STL will necessarily use Stacy as a designated goal line runner, whether he retains his hold on the primary ball carrier job or not.

If Stacy and Mason both emerge as top half of the league talents at their position, there could be far worse problems for STL to have. Especially since neither came at a heavy expenditure of draft capital (fifth and third), and taken in combination were relatively inexpensive as a tandem.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with you Bob that I do not take the pick of Mason to mean they do not like Stacy or that they do not think Stacy can be their starting RB. However he did get nicked up several times over the 2013 (and preseason) so hardly the stall worth of durability akin to Eddie George in his prime. Which I will digress to point out that some of the things that made George such a special RB were his durability, toughness and stamina. Needless to say I do not think the Rams have a RB of his caliber on the roster right now.

As I have said before I think the pick of Mason is more about fixing the bust pick of Pead. Hopefully. Giving them 2 good options to work with. If both do not play up to expectations in 2014 I do not consider either of them safe from potentially another "high" pick to challenge them in 2015.

I am pretty amused by people considering a 3rd round pick a high investment though. Times have changed. :)

 
I agree with you Bob that I do not take the pick of Mason to mean they do not like Stacy or that they do not think Stacy can be their starting RB. However he did get nicked up several times over the 2013 (and preseason) so hardly the stall worth of durability akin to Eddie George in his prime. Which I will digress to point out that some of the things that made George such a special RB were his durability, toughness and stamina. Needless to say I do not think the Rams have a RB of his caliber on the roster right now.

As I have said before I think the pick of Mason is more about fixing the bust pick of Pead. Hopefully. Giving them 2 good options to work with. If both do not play up to expectations in 2014 I do not consider either of them safe from potentially another "high" pick to challenge them in 2015.

I am pretty amused by people considering a 3rd round pick a high investment though. Times have changed. :)
They definitely have. I took a look at the history of the 5th RB taken in the draft, which Mason was, and here's what I found:

- from 2000-2009 the 5th RB was not taken later than pick 54 (with the exception of 2003 which was an outlier of 99)

- since 2010 the 5th RB was not taken earlier than pick 58.

- Mason at 75 was 10 spots lower than the 5th RB taken in any draft, apart from 2003.

 
Saw this recent rotoblurb below regarding Mason signing and it references he's recovering from wrist surgery. I was under the impression it was a possibility he would need surgery but never heard about him actually moving forward with it. Anyone have any idea if this is accurate?

Tre Mason - RB - Rams
Rams signed No. 75 overall pick RB Tre Mason to a four-year contract.
Recovering from wrist surgery, Mason says he's been told he'll compete for the Rams' starting job. We don't expect Mason to seriously push Zac Stacy for No. 1 duties, but he should open the year as St. Louis' COP back. Mason has ball security and pass protection issues that he needs to sort through in camp, but is a tough runner and explosive athlete. He's a high-upside selection in D

 
Saw this recent rotoblurb below regarding Mason signing and it references he's recovering from wrist surgery. I was under the impression it was a possibility he would need surgery but never heard about him actually moving forward with it. Anyone have any idea if this is accurate?

Tre Mason - RB - Rams
Rams signed No. 75 overall pick RB Tre Mason to a four-year contract.
Recovering from wrist surgery, Mason says he's been told he'll compete for the Rams' starting job. We don't expect Mason to seriously push Zac Stacy for No. 1 duties, but he should open the year as St. Louis' COP back. Mason has ball security and pass protection issues that he needs to sort through in camp, but is a tough runner and explosive athlete. He's a high-upside selection in D
I recall prior to the draft a reporter asking Mason about the injury. Mason seemed pretty annoyed at the question and refused to answer it.

I think that is perfectly understandable. As no player hoping to be drafted as high as possible wants to spend time talking about a negative that could have an effect on that. At the same time I got the impression from Mason's reaction similar to how I think a lot of players have. They some times do not cooperate with doctors and others trying to help them. This sometimes can cause the player to not get treatment they might need because the player would rather ignore the issue than risk missing opportunity.

Not saying that this is what is going on with Mason at all and I could be wrong about his overall attitude about the injury. Just sharing a mental note I had about this filed away for the future.

 
Fisher reported Stacy recently did a 500 lb. BP, which may be a Rams record for a RB.

I realize weight lifters may not make good RBs and RBs don't have to be weight lifters, but I didn't realize he was that strong.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with you Bob that I do not take the pick of Mason to mean they do not like Stacy or that they do not think Stacy can be their starting RB. However he did get nicked up several times over the 2013 (and preseason) so hardly the stall worth of durability akin to Eddie George in his prime. Which I will digress to point out that some of the things that made George such a special RB were his durability, toughness and stamina. Needless to say I do not think the Rams have a RB of his caliber on the roster right now.

As I have said before I think the pick of Mason is more about fixing the bust pick of Pead. Hopefully. Giving them 2 good options to work with. If both do not play up to expectations in 2014 I do not consider either of them safe from potentially another "high" pick to challenge them in 2015.

I am pretty amused by people considering a 3rd round pick a high investment though. Times have changed. :)
EXCUSE ME, WHILE I KISS THIS GUY!!!

That's the correct lyric, right?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Saw this recent rotoblurb below regarding Mason signing and it references he's recovering from wrist surgery. I was under the impression it was a possibility he would need surgery but never heard about him actually moving forward with it. Anyone have any idea if this is accurate?

Tre Mason - RB - Rams
Rams signed No. 75 overall pick RB Tre Mason to a four-year contract.
Recovering from wrist surgery, Mason says he's been told he'll compete for the Rams' starting job. We don't expect Mason to seriously push Zac Stacy for No. 1 duties, but he should open the year as St. Louis' COP back. Mason has ball security and pass protection issues that he needs to sort through in camp, but is a tough runner and explosive athlete. He's a high-upside selection in D
I recall prior to the draft a reporter asking Mason about the injury. Mason seemed pretty annoyed at the question and refused to answer it.

I think that is perfectly understandable. As no player hoping to be drafted as high as possible wants to spend time talking about a negative that could have an effect on that. At the same time I got the impression from Mason's reaction similar to how I think a lot of players have. They some times do not cooperate with doctors and others trying to help them. This sometimes can cause the player to not get treatment they might need because the player would rather ignore the issue than risk missing opportunity.

Not saying that this is what is going on with Mason at all and I could be wrong about his overall attitude about the injury. Just sharing a mental note I had about this filed away for the future.
You got all that from a simple reaction to an annoying question?

 
So... why is everyone all over Michael like he is the next Jim Brown, yet thinking a guy like Mason can step up an do the same is crazy?

  • Michael has a stud in front of him, Mason don't. (You thinking Stacy can be a stud is differently than actually being one)
  • Mason is younger.
  • Both have been active for almost the same amount of NFL games :P and Michael only has 18 more carries than Mason.
  • Both were taken withing a 15 picks of each other in the NFL draft.
  • Mason had a more successful college career in a tougher division putting up better stats in just three years then Michael did in four.
Michael never ran for over 899 yards, while Mason just ran for over 1800.

So what I ask, what in the world makes Michael more valuable and better than Mason?

You are right folks, nothing... just hype by Michael owners.

 
I love Jimi Hendrix but I have no idea what you are talking about Ned. :whoosh:
What is a "stall worth"?
Ah auto correct does not like my olde English.

Are you one of those people who love antiques? You hang around yard sales on weekends for some rare item that might be up for sale. You stop at every antique mall on your way to grandpa's house. In a way, you love to travel back in time.

If you're one of those folks, consider this week's words as unpackng the antique trunk of the English language. Linguistically, they're called archaic terms. They were once everyday words, but today they reveal their age. They have an old-time appeal.

Not that these words show any wear and tear. They're still ready to serve, patiently waiting in the pages of dictionaries, even though labeled as senior citizens of the language. They haven't called it quits. They still have their shingles up. Verily, I urge you to become better acquainted with them.

stalworth (STOL-wurth) adjective

Stalwart: strong, dependable, firm.

[From Middle English, from Old English staelwierthe (serviceable), from stathol (support) + weorth (worth).]

-Anu Garg (words at wordsmith.org)

"That the theorists were on the money speaks well for the power of scientific speculation and calculation and is a testament to the stalworth pundits of the last half century who nurtured a field." Minas Kafatos and Andrew Michalitsianos; Supernova 1987A in the Large Magellanic Cloud; Cambridge University Press; Jun 9, 1988.

X-BonusBe careful how you interpret the world: it is like that. -Erich Heller, essayist (1911-1990) http://wordsmith.org/words/stalworth.html
As far as the other bit I am still a bit woosh but that's ok. :nerd:

 
Phenix said:
So... why is everyone all over Michael like he is the next Jim Brown, yet thinking a guy like Mason can step up an do the same is crazy?

  • Michael has a stud in front of him, Mason don't. (You thinking Stacy can be a stud is differently than actually being one)
  • Mason is younger.
  • Both have been active for almost the same amount of NFL games :P and Michael only has 18 more carries than Mason.
  • Both were taken withing a 15 picks of each other in the NFL draft.
  • Mason had a more successful college career in a tougher division putting up better stats in just three years then Michael did in four.
Michael never ran for over 899 yards, while Mason just ran for over 1800.So what I ask, what in the world makes Michael more valuable and better than Mason?

You are right folks, nothing... just hype by Michael owners.
The facts are accurate.

A few you left out, since you asked.

Lynch is older than Stacy.

Not that Mason is a slouch athletically (ran some sub-4.5s, 38.5" VJ), but Michael is more freakish.

 
Phenix said:
So... why is everyone all over Michael like he is the next Jim Brown, yet thinking a guy like Mason can step up an do the same is crazy?

  • Michael has a stud in front of him, Mason don't. (You thinking Stacy can be a stud is differently than actually being one)
  • Mason is younger.
  • Both have been active for almost the same amount of NFL games :P and Michael only has 18 more carries than Mason.
  • Both were taken withing a 15 picks of each other in the NFL draft.
  • Mason had a more successful college career in a tougher division putting up better stats in just three years then Michael did in four.
Michael never ran for over 899 yards, while Mason just ran for over 1800.So what I ask, what in the world makes Michael more valuable and better than Mason?

You are right folks, nothing... just hype by Michael owners.
The facts are accurate.

A few you left out, since you asked.

Lynch is older than Stacy.

Not that Mason is a slouch athletically (ran some sub-4.5s, 38.5" VJ), but Michael is more freakish.
Lynch's contract is currently very "cuttable" next year, whereas Stacy's is very team-friendly.

And as Bob mentioned, Michael is a bit of an athletic freak. Mason is not.

 
Does being an athletic freak make you a better running back? Cuz the best of the best, to me, were freaks in one way.. vision.

 
Are people really claiming Mason displayed vision in an offense Felix Jones and DMC excelled in? Hitting gaping holes doesn't constitute having good vision.

 
Are people really claiming Mason displayed vision in an offense Felix Jones and DMC excelled in? Hitting gaping holes doesn't constitute having good vision.
Dmc? As in McFadden? Arkansas

Felix jones....

As in Arkansas felix jones?

LOL

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Aren't you the same guy pleading for people to be more excellent to each other in the 3 josh Gordon threads?

 
Are people really claiming Mason displayed vision in an offense Felix Jones and DMC excelled in? Hitting gaping holes doesn't constitute having good vision.
McFadden and Jones were both very good RBs. Talent wasn't the issue with either guy -- it was durability.

 
Phenix said:
So... why is everyone all over Michael like he is the next Jim Brown, yet thinking a guy like Mason can step up an do the same is crazy?

  • Michael has a stud in front of him, Mason don't. (You thinking Stacy can be a stud is differently than actually being one)
  • Mason is younger.
  • Both have been active for almost the same amount of NFL games :P and Michael only has 18 more carries than Mason.
  • Both were taken withing a 15 picks of each other in the NFL draft.
  • Mason had a more successful college career in a tougher division putting up better stats in just three years then Michael did in four.
Michael never ran for over 899 yards, while Mason just ran for over 1800.So what I ask, what in the world makes Michael more valuable and better than Mason?

You are right folks, nothing... just hype by Michael owners.
The facts are accurate.

A few you left out, since you asked.

Lynch is older than Stacy.

Not that Mason is a slouch athletically (ran some sub-4.5s, 38.5" VJ), but Michael is more freakish.
That is an opinion, not a fact.

 
Michael is bigger, stronger, faster, quicker and has a more explosive vertical jump than Mason. I really don't even think we need to use qualifiers like arguably or debateably here, it's pretty conclusive. It sounds like it's your opinion that it's an opinion, in fact it's a fact. :)

I operationally define freak as highly athletic, in case there is any confusion on terms.

Michael (5'10", 220 lbs.)

40 - 4.43

VJ - 43"

broad jump - 10'5"

BP - 27

shuttle -4.02

3 cone - 6.69

Mason (5'8" 208 lbs.)

40 - 4.50

VJ - 38.5"

broad jump - 10'6"

BP - ?

shuttle - 4.15

3 cone - ?

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000357110/article/making-the-leap-no-23-christine-michael

The former Texas A&M thumper with freakish combine numbers brings a hard-charging, downhill style to his game that fits perfectly with Seattle's offense. "He has breakaway speed and power behind his pads," coordinator Darrell Bevell recently cooed.

General manager John Schneider has labeled Michael and Percy Harvin as "two of our most explosive offensive players."

The Texas A&M strength coach who trained both Michael and Adrian Peterson told ESPN's Louis Riddick that "Christine's athletic explosiveness is on par" with the Vikings All-Pro back.

http://sportspressnw.com/2185845/2014/thiel-rb-michael-seahawks-man-of-mystery?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A%20SportspressNW%20%28Sportspress%20Northwest%20RSS%20Feed%29

"In the scouting combine prior to the 2013 draft among the running backs, the former Texas A&M star had the highest vertical leap (43 inches) and cone (6.69 seconds) and shuttle (4.02 seconds) drills. He was second in the broad jump (10 feet, 5 inches) and third in the bench press (27 reps with 225 pounds). His time of 4.43 seconds in the 40-yard dash ranked ninth, but only one of the eight faster backs weighed more than 210 pounds."

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Quote from NFL.com

With his locker adjacent to second-year runner Zac Stacy's, Mason said the competition hasn't caused any tension:

"Us playing together, we're going to try to turn that program around," said Mason, who told us teams will regret skipping him in the draft. "I feel like I was overlooked and now it's time for me to prove why. I feel like I landed in the right spot."
Hope he makes them pay. I would guess Mason starts out as a COP back to start the season, and carves out a higher and higher percent of touches throughout the season. By season's end I expect a full blown RBBC. Given how much I would expect the Rams to pound the ball, both players may have starting RB2 value by the end of the season.

 
Confirmation that it is a competition for the starting job. I read in another context (OL) that a heavy emphasis is being put on pass protection, the coaches need to get Mason up to speed there.

http://lindyssports.com/nfl/st-louis-rams/column/nfl-player-news/rams-stacy-looks-to-replicate-rookie-success/218966

Rams’ Stacy looks to replicate rookie success
Sports Xchange

June 17, 2014 at 5:04 pm.

EARTH CITY, Mo. — It is often said that the biggest improvement for many NFL players occurs in their second season. There is a full offseason program following a year in which rookies are thrown quickly into the mix after the whirlwind that comes with preparing for the draft. Very quickly, those rookies have to learn what is involved with being a pro.

As the St. Louis Rams began their final week of organized team activities, one of those second-year players explained the difference in 2014 compared to 2013 even with the production he was able to achieve as a rookie.

Said running back Zac Stacy, the team’s fifth-round pick in 2013, “The good thing about last year is that I enjoyed success while gaining experience. It feels very different because you know what to expect, know your role on the team. Last year, as rookies, we were all running around like chickens with our heads cut off.”

Now, Stacy is concentrating on simply getting better after a season in which he fell just 27 yards short of 1,000 yards despite having one rushing attempt for four yards in the first four games of the season two of which he was inactive.

“For me, despite the success I had last year, I still have a lot of improvement to do,” Stacy said. “That’s what I’m most excited about; the improvement I can make to become a better running back, to be a complete back – running, protecting and catching balls out of the backfield.”

Running back Daryl Richardson opened the 2013 season as the starter, and had 20 carries for 63 yards in a season-opening win over Arizona. The notion that the Rams suddenly returned to a ground-oriented attack after four games is refuted by the attempts Richardson had in that first game. But Richardson also suffered a toe injury in the opener. He continued to play, but had just 35 yards on 10 attempts in Week 2 against Atlanta.

In Week 3, Richardson was 4-for-16 and Isaiah Pead 6-for-20 against Dallas. The worst was a 35-11 loss in a Week 4 Thursday night game against San Francisco when Richardson was benched after a first half total of 16 yards on 12 carries. Benny Cunningham managed just six yards on four second-half attempts. With a few extra days to regroup, the decision was made to start Stacy in Week 5 against Jacksonville. He responded with 78 yards on 14 attempts, the Rams won 34-20 and Stacy became the workhorse.

Now, he is competing to keep that job after the Rams selected Tre Mason in the third round of this year’s draft. Richardson was released after Mason was picked.

Both Stacy (Vanderbilt) and Mason (Auburn) excelled in the rough and tumble world of the SEC, and Stacy welcomes Mason’s arrival.

Said Stacy, “I’m happy for Tre and glad he’s here. There’s going to be competition, no doubt about it.”

For his part, Mason said, “I respect his style of play. We’re going to become a great duo together. I played against Zac my sophomore year, and he took over the game when we played him. I’m willing to put in work with him.”

Offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer noted there will be competition at the position and that it also includes Pead and Cunningham.

“Right now, competition is for who’s the starter,” Schottenheimer said Tuesday. “We’re just going to let them all roll and see what happens. Zac’s obviously a really, really good player, but we’re going to create competition for all the guys. That’s a long way off, but we know we have a good stable group of backs and they all have different skill sets, which we’ll try to use throughout the course of the year.”

When a surprised reporter asked if that means Stacy isn’t guaranteed to be the starter, Schottenheimer said, “No, not at all. We’re just trying to create competition. That’s what we’re trying to do and whoever wins the job, wins the job. But I expect to see multiple guys carry the football.”

Stacy understands that one season does not a career make.

“My goal is to be as productive and as consistent as possible. My main emphasis is studying the playbook and knowing it like the back of my hand. By doing that, I’ll be able to play faster and smarter. Really for me, it’s not the success I had last year. I still have a lot of improving to do. That’s what I’m most excited about, the improvement I can make to be a better running back, be a better complete back, running, protecting and catching balls out of the backfield, so that’s really just my main focus right now.

“My goal is to be as productive and as consistent as possible. My main emphasis is studying the playbook and knowing it like the back off my hand. By doing that, I’ll be able to play faster and smarter.”

Stacy wasn’t bad in pass protection last season, but he did have a few hiccups. He knows that’s an often unsung part of the job for a running back, especially when he can be the last line of defense before the quarterback potentially gets pummeled.

He concluded, “Sam Bradford, you look at him and he’s the money man so it’s very important to protect his butt. We take pride in that as running backs and we’re going to continue to do that.”

 
Confirmation that it is a competition for the starting job. I read in another context (OL) that a heavy emphasis is being put on pass protection, the coaches need to get Mason up to speed there.

http://lindyssports.com/nfl/st-louis-rams/column/nfl-player-news/rams-stacy-looks-to-replicate-rookie-success/218966

Rams’ Stacy looks to replicate rookie success

Sports Xchange

“Right now, competition is for who’s the starter,” Schottenheimer said Tuesday. “We’re just going to let them all roll and see what happens. Zac’s obviously a really, really good player, but we’re going to create competition for all the guys. That’s a long way off, but we know we have a good stable group of backs and they all have different skill sets, which we’ll try to use throughout the course of the year.”

When a surprised reporter asked if that means Stacy isn’t guaranteed to be the starter, Schottenheimer said, “No, not at all. We’re just trying to create competition. That’s what we’re trying to do and whoever wins the job, wins the job. But I expect to see multiple guys carry the football.”

Stacy understands that one season does not a career make.
All that matters in that post.

 
Does being an athletic freak make you a better running back? Cuz the best of the best, to me, were freaks in one way.. vision.
:rolleyes: It tends to help. The most important traits of a running back, IMO, are vision, agility, and elusiveness. The best RBs tend to possess at least 2 out of 3 of these. For instance, Lynch had mediocre agility scores, but he forces a lot of missed tackles and breaks a lot of tackles.

Michael is more freakish.
That is an opinion, not a fact.
:no: No, no it is not an opinion. It is indeed a fact so long as Bob was referring to athleticism.

 
Correct me if I'm wrong but was Trung "the dung" Canidate freakishly athletic too? I don't think having athletic ability makes you a shoe in to be great in any sport.

 
Correct me if I'm wrong but was Trung "the dung" Canidate freakishly athletic too? I don't think having athletic ability makes you a shoe in to be great in any sport.
You are indeed incorrect. He did not complete the agility tests at the combine so there is no evidence he was freakishly athletic. He was also small (193 lbs), making his 4.41 40 time much less impressive.

 
Correct me if I'm wrong but was Trung "the dung" Canidate freakishly athletic too? I don't think having athletic ability makes you a shoe in to be great in any sport.
You are indeed incorrect. He did not complete the agility tests at the combine so there is no evidence he was freakishly athletic. He was also small (193 lbs), making his 4.41 40 time much less impressive.
So now you have to complete agility tests at the combine to be considered a freak? I'm starting to understand that logic more and more. Nothing shows a freak athlete like a long jump and the 3 cone drill.

 
Does being an athletic freak make you a better running back? Cuz the best of the best, to me, were freaks in one way.. vision.
:rolleyes: It tends to help. The most important traits of a running back, IMO, are vision, agility, and elusiveness. The best RBs tend to possess at least 2 out of 3 of these. For instance, Lynch had mediocre agility scores, but he forces a lot of missed tackles and breaks a lot of tackles.

Michael is more freakish.
That is an opinion, not a fact.
:no: No, no it is not an opinion. It is indeed a fact so long as Bob was referring to athleticism.
Judging a persons athleticism is an opinion, are you kidding me? :lol:

 
The more I study Mason the less I'm impressed. I think you guys are going to get burned pretty bad picking him high in rookie drafts expecting him to supplant Zac Stacy.

 
The more I study Mason the less I'm impressed. I think you guys are going to get burned pretty bad picking him high in rookie drafts expecting him to supplant Zac Stacy.
because?
...he is a Stacy owner.
Can we retire the lame "he a owner" post?? Actually, I drafted Stacy in every league last year and sold him in EVERY league pre-draft at a premium. Even if I did own him, I could still give an honest response regarding the two. Do you think you're capable of the sameTre Mason owner?
 
The more I study Mason the less I'm impressed. I think you guys are going to get burned pretty bad picking him high in rookie drafts expecting him to supplant Zac Stacy.
because?
...he is a Stacy owner.
Can we retire the lame "he a owner" post?? Actually, I drafted Stacy in every league last year and sold him in EVERY league pre-draft at a premium. Even if I did own him, I could still give an honest response regarding the two. Do you think you're capable of the sameTre Mason owner?
Yet I cant seem to sell Stacy is every league I have him.

Im willing to sell at a very cut rate deal, but everyone in my league thinks what I think

 
The more I study Mason the less I'm impressed. I think you guys are going to get burned pretty bad picking him high in rookie drafts expecting him to supplant Zac Stacy.
because?
...he is a Stacy owner.
Can we retire the lame "he a owner" post?? Actually, I drafted Stacy in every league last year and sold him in EVERY league pre-draft at a premium. Even if I did own him, I could still give an honest response regarding the two. Do you think you're capable of the sameTre Mason owner?
Yet I cant seem to sell Stacy is every league I have him.

Im willing to sell at a very cut rate deal, but everyone in my league thinks what I think
I tend to get lucky.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top