fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
Bingo 
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
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.
Christine Michael Volume 3: Inevitable Greatness Soon Achieved (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter elshagon
- Start date
Tau837
Footballguy
jurb26
Footballguy
Would anyone really want to start CM? That's a terrible correlation.We at least know McFadden has a role in the offense, even if it's limited. His role, like CM's is primed to expand. Probably more so. He's likely the 3rd down back now.
Last edited by a moderator:
gethugefast1
Footballguy
Personally, I wouldn't start either. I'm waiting for the weekly soap opera to fall in place.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
McFadden is a proven mediocrity over the last couple of seasons. I really don't see any upside even if his role expands. I'm not even a Michael supporter, but as an unknown he's a better dynasty asset than a veteran mediocrity that you'd be loathe to start on your team.
jurb26
Footballguy
This is pretty ridiculous. Anyone who gets an expanded role has greater upside than they had before. This is true for both McFaddn and CM right now. Short term, McFadden has more value. Perhaps long term CM does. Even still you are basically rewarding a guy for doing nothing which doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Mediocre RBs are capable of rewarding fantasy owners if they get opportunity. We see it every year. Guys who aren't getting on the field on the other hand, can't. Plus, we haven't even seen CM prove he is capable of being mediocre let alone more. Nothing thus far suggest he is but the book is still being written.
Right now we know McFadden is part of the rotation and 2nd in that rotation. It also appears he is the 3rd down back. With CM, he will get in for a series and if the "got hand" might see more.
ourmanflint
Footballguy
Tau837
Footballguy
Would anyone want to start CM today? No. Would anyone want to start McFadden today? No.
Which of these two has a higher ceiling? Michael. So I'd rather have Michael not starting on my bench than McFadden.
It seems rather obvious IMO.
jurb26
Footballguy
You have no idea if CM has a higher ceiling. That fine if you want to believe that but it's pure speculation. Don't present it as if it's a fact.
duaneok66
Footballguy
jurb26
Footballguy
I don't want either but that's not really the point.
duaneok66
Footballguy
I understand what both parties are saying. Of course McFadden's value increases if he gets an expanded role. I think the point was that right now - NO one wants McFadden while at least a few people can speculate on Michael's future.
You guys are basically on the same page - just arguing semantics.
You guys are basically on the same page - just arguing semantics.
pollardsvision
Footballguy
If DMC scores more than CM this year, I doubt many will be too excited about CM's fantasy prospects going forward. Pretty much everything is breaking right for CM to get an opportunity to show something this year. Dunbar is out. Randle has been mediocre and made a really boneheaded play last week. DMC is DMC. He'll either suck with a potential expanded role moving forward, or get hurt.
He's essentially in a direct competition with DMC for touches (not necessarily the same touches, but quantity), and if DMC is more effective in this opportunity over the next 12 games, I'm not sure where we hang our hat for the CM bandwagon.
I own both in a dynasty-ish league. Not that I expect much from either. I'm just desperate (I'm starting Chris Thompson this week).
Last edited by a moderator:
EBF
Footballguy
Nothing, given that he's been with the team for four weeks. Let's revisit this at the end of the season. If he's still not playing, I'll concede the point. IIRC you were a huge McFadden believer when he was coming out of college, so I think maybe you're still clinging to that dream a bit. It is painfully apparent watching him play right now that he offers very little.
jurb26
Footballguy
You don't follow or read very well. I said just a few post ago I wouldn't want either.I guess I have to also remind you for like a 100th time that I was a big supporter of CM coming out of college as well. Means about as much right now.
Plus, you're the one speaking in such hyperbole with terms like "turd." A turd should be able to get supplanted in days, not weeks or months.
Last edited by a moderator:
The Man With No Name
Footballguy
McFadden has one season over 707 yards rushing in his 8 seasons and that was in 2010. He is not and will not be fantasy relevant. I would rather have a guy that has not yet proven that he can or cannot be.
AAABatteries
Footballguy
Tau837
Footballguy
Really, dude? Do I really need to state the obvious for you that it is my opinion that Michael has a higher ceiling? Come on. I even ended the post with IMO. Are you familiar with that term?jurb26 said:
Serious question. Are you saying you do not feel Michael has a higher ceiling than McFadden at this point in time? Yes or no.
Last edited by a moderator:
fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
My ceiling is similar to McFadden.
jurb26
Footballguy
You ended your post with "It seems rather obvious IMO" not just IMO. Clearly you can see the difference. Saying you think something is rather obvious, even if it's your opinion, alludes more to a factual stance than just an opinion. It's just your opinion that it's so obvious we should all agree. Right now, I think McFadden has the higher ceiling because he has the more defined role and CM has never in 3 years amounted to anything beyond a 3rd string RB. McFadden is higher in the rotation and seems to have a defined role of 3rd down work.
Could that change by seasons end or next season? Sure, but you're asking about right now.
I don't like either guy very much and have little faith in either but I'll take the guy who is likely to get more opportunity. That appears to be McFadden.
fantasycurse42
Footballguy Jr.
I'd say 90-95% or higher do agree here, you're in the extreme minority. We have a lot of data on DMC to know his ceiling, he's basically unstartable in all circumstances. If the Cowboys said he'd be getting 80% of touches, I'd still be reluctant and skeptical to start the guy. He's very injury prone and not very talented.
Dismattle
Footballguy
http://www.bostonglobe.com/sports/2015/10/10/patriots-keys-victory-over-cowboys/2sKKqX339ursibiBNQgXaJ/story.html
Darren McFadden will get first crack at making an impact Sunday..
I thought this was kinda interesting.. I mean most news sites (imo) have stated Randle will start, followed by McFadden, and then CMike!
Now Im a nascar fan so trading paint is part of the action.. In other words, Im not implying "cheating", but it sounded interesting to read 'McFadden will get first crack".
Also can we limit trade evaluations to somewhat relevant players.. Once again were talking a lottery ticket that could replicate Murray, but include passing stats..
Im not sure it makes sense to settle for a bn backup that ya wouldnt really start..
Darren McFadden will get first crack at making an impact Sunday..
I thought this was kinda interesting.. I mean most news sites (imo) have stated Randle will start, followed by McFadden, and then CMike!
Now Im a nascar fan so trading paint is part of the action.. In other words, Im not implying "cheating", but it sounded interesting to read 'McFadden will get first crack".
Also can we limit trade evaluations to somewhat relevant players.. Once again were talking a lottery ticket that could replicate Murray, but include passing stats..
Im not sure it makes sense to settle for a bn backup that ya wouldnt really start..
Sabertooth
Footballguy
Well put.
Perfect analogy that most should be able to agree with. It's about taking a shot. CMike is a lotto ticket that might hit or he could be absolutely worthless and end up in the trash like 90% of lotto tickets. DMC supporters will say a dollar has value and can buy something and take a more "a bird in hand" approach. And I wouldn't disagree with them if I needed CMike now. I'm just willing to roll the dice on end of roster fodder.
cr8f
Footballguy
Ceiling? Come on. No one nows what he can do there yet. He;s had one carry into a brick wall.
Milkman
Footballguy
McFadden takes over Dunbar's role as the 3rd down/passing down back
Randle keeps his early down role
C-Mike essentially taking over McFadden's old role.
Anybody that doesn't see a clear path to 15+ touches a game for C-Mike is just trolling. Not saying he's a lock for that or anything but all he has to do is look better than Randle and he'll eventually be the first RB in the game. That's not a tall order.
Randle keeps his early down role
C-Mike essentially taking over McFadden's old role.
Anybody that doesn't see a clear path to 15+ touches a game for C-Mike is just trolling. Not saying he's a lock for that or anything but all he has to do is look better than Randle and he'll eventually be the first RB in the game. That's not a tall order.
Sabertooth
Footballguy
When did you become so insulting? What are you trying to gain from this conversation?
And in that one season he had 1157 yards rushing, plus 43 receptions for another 507 years. He was fantasy gold that year in PPR leagues. People act is he never had any fantasy relevance, but he did in 2010.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
Hi guys it's me, Chaka, the Official Let's Try To Keep it Excellent Inspector. Remember we don't want any bannings or to get this thread locked.
I think there are valid points being made from both jurb and everyone else (who all seem to be aligning against jurb). I typically agree with jurb about taking the guy who has the most opportunity because you can't do much if you don't get the ball. However I think that even if McFadden takes the Dunbar role (about 7.5 touches/game), and I think he will, it will likely come at the expense of his old role in the offense, which amounted to 8.75 touches/game. I do not believe that McFadden will simply start getting 16 touches/game (which is what Randle gets, and I think will continue to get) and keep Michael on the pine.
That, IMO, opens the door for Michael to assume all or part of McFadden's previous 9 touches per game. Again IMO, I prefer Michael's upside on those limited touches (o/u = 6 IMO) because even in his previous role (again 9 touches/game) McFadden did very little with them.
As always let's try to keep it excellent in here.
Cheers
I think there are valid points being made from both jurb and everyone else (who all seem to be aligning against jurb). I typically agree with jurb about taking the guy who has the most opportunity because you can't do much if you don't get the ball. However I think that even if McFadden takes the Dunbar role (about 7.5 touches/game), and I think he will, it will likely come at the expense of his old role in the offense, which amounted to 8.75 touches/game. I do not believe that McFadden will simply start getting 16 touches/game (which is what Randle gets, and I think will continue to get) and keep Michael on the pine.
That, IMO, opens the door for Michael to assume all or part of McFadden's previous 9 touches per game. Again IMO, I prefer Michael's upside on those limited touches (o/u = 6 IMO) because even in his previous role (again 9 touches/game) McFadden did very little with them.
As always let's try to keep it excellent in here.
Cheers
Chaka
Footballguy
He was having a monster in 2010 and his 2011 looked pretty good too. However that seems like a looooooooooong time ago in football years. Particularly for a guy who has had multiple lower leg injuries (Link). I am not sure he ever came back from the lisfranc that ended his 2011 season. He certainly never produced that way on the field, but the Raiders were a dumpster fire so it is a little hard to tell for certain.And in that one season he had 1157 yards rushing, plus 43 receptions for another 507 years. He was fantasy relevant that year. People act is he never had any fantasy relevance, but he did in 2010.
jurb26
Footballguy
Touches matter, so thank you for cutting to the point here. I'm not sure why CM would suddenly get more touches than McFadden, though. If McFadden is assuming the Dunbar role why does that mean he totally vacates his old role? Why would he suddenly be getting less touches than prior? This doesn't make a lot of sense IMO.
Maybe CM outperforms McFadden earning the greater workload. That's certainly possible but that is not how it looks heading into the game at least.
SaintsInDome2006
Footballguy
No one really knows what will happen today. The Cowboys have been almost exclusively passing in the 4th quarter. If the Pats take a big lead the Cowboys can either do their dink and dunk to Mac (or maybe Randle if the Boys leave him in), Witten and Beasely or the Pats can let them run all day. We know the Pats will take the Cowboys' best weapon away but what the heck is that right now, Williams? Witten? You could end up with a null result today and a bye next week.
Tau837
Footballguy
Maybe we disagree on the meaning of the term ceiling in a fantasy football context. Ceiling means if the best case scenario happens. You are saying you think McFadden's best case scenario is better than Michael's best case scenario when you say you think McFadden has a higher ceiling.
Meanwhile, saying you'll take the guy who is likely to get more opportunity isn't really talking about ceiling value, it is talking more about expected value. So you are crossing the streams in this conversation.
I don't see ceiling as a particularly fluid thing in season. It can change if a player changes teams or his team changes coaching philosophies, or something fundamental like that. But ceiling always accounts for a scenario in which a player gets his best opportunity, so your argument about role being a factor in ceiling is nonsensical. In my opinion, of course.
Speaking of the opinion thing, if you couldn't tell that my post was my opinion, you need to improve your reading comprehension. Oh wait, you did know it was my opinion, because you made sure to point it out in your first response. Which begs the question of why you even felt you needed to mention it in the first place.
Gopher State
Footballguy
Last chance to trade for him on the cheap
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
I didn't say CM would get more touches, I never said any of those things you are suggesting. I said that his assumption of the Dunbar would come at the expense of his previous role. There are 16 touches, roughly, up for grabs (Dunbar's & McFadden's). I put Michael's o/u @ 6, which means that McFadden will get ~10, which would be an increase in touches for both.
What I don't think will happen is that McFadden will simply start getting 16 total touches (his old role + Dunbar's) along with Randle (who averages about 16 touches) and Michael gets left out.
Chaka
Footballguy
I think this is a great point for today. Michael is a very bad start today IMO because it is likely that the Pats will simply crush them and I am pretty sure that will favor their receiving back, which looks to be McFadden.
jurb26
Footballguy
Huh, how exactly are we supposed to interpret this? This looks like you are saying McFadden shifts from his old role (9 touches per game) to Dunbar role (7.5 touches per game). With CM assuming McFaddns old role (9 touches per game).
This would mean McFadden gets less touches than prior, CM more and CM getting more than McFadden, no?
I don't think McFadden gets 16 touches, either. I think he gets more than CM but neither will be particularly high on touches.
Last edited by a moderator:
timbrah_ho
Footballguy
Too much over analysis going on. Might make sense to keep it simple...we have no idea how this will break and the Cowboy coaching staff might not know unless it slaps them across the face. But the simple truth as of today:
1) Dunbars injury leaves an opening and more work CM (and a permanent place in the active roster)
2) what happens from there will be decided based on how CM looks. Everything else both ways is pure speculation. Enjoy the ride
1) Dunbars injury leaves an opening and more work CM (and a permanent place in the active roster)
2) what happens from there will be decided based on how CM looks. Everything else both ways is pure speculation. Enjoy the ride
Last edited by a moderator:
Chaka
Footballguy
Well I think you might be conflating "assumption" and "expense" with "assumption" and "expense" + "to the exclusion of", which was not my intended implication. I think it was clear in the first post and I think I made it even more clear in the second post.Huh, how exactly are we supposed to interpret this?This looks like you are saying McFadden shifts from his old role (9 touches per game) to Dunbar role (7.5 touches per game). With CM assuming McFaddns old role (9 touches per game).
This would mean McFadden gets less touches than prior, CM more and CM getting more than McFadden, no?
I don't think McFadden gets 16 touches, either. I think he gets more than CM but neither will be particularly high on touches.
In the most basic terms 16 total touches:
-Michael o/u = 6
-McFadden o/u = 10
That represents an increase in touches for both.
Last edited by a moderator: