So you're telling me there's a chance! Chris Carson Edition ***POLL***

[_yeti]

I agreed with you then and agree with you now.

Edit/addition: that said, the confident manner of your posts can come off as arrogant to a lot of people, which will make them naturally oppose your views, even if only subconsciously.
“I told you so” posts influence minds to close and argue, rather than open and listen.

Understood but it fleshes out debate about fringe players. The undervalued players where the consensus goes the other way are a huge edge in this game. Maybe I stir the pot a little but still, I usually have to be poked before I poke back. Also, the more people who disagree the better, it's fun. Then we can see who was right. I am not trolling, if people subconsciously disagree with me because of delivery but then it turns out I was factually correct, then they missed out. And if I am wrong I will eat it, I have before and will again because these are the fun areas to debate (rather than the "easy" debates like who are your top 3 rookie RBs, etc.).

And I listen to plenty and have agreed with you, Phaded, many others, many times before. I also am in the camp (and know I am not alone) that thinks adding X2 or such small posts clutter up a thread and add little. I would rather allow people with a strong opinion duke it out. And in that spirit there have been countless times I just lurk in a thread and agree with one side or the other. If I'm out for blood when I'm in the ring it's never personal, Remember where you are - this is Thunderdome

[FantasyFreak]

I agreed with you then and agree with you now.

Edit/addition: that said, the confident manner of your posts can come off as arrogant to a lot of people, which will make them naturally oppose your views, even if only subconsciously.
“I told you so” posts influence minds to close and argue, rather than open and listen.

Understood but it fleshes out debate about fringe players. The undervalued players where the consensus goes the other way are a huge edge in this game. Maybe I stir the pot a little but still, I usually have to be poked before I poke back. Also, the more people who disagree the better, it's fun. Then we can see who was right. I am not trolling, if people subconsciously disagree with me because of delivery but then it turns out I was factually correct, then they missed out. And if I am wrong I will eat it, I have before and will again because these are the fun areas to debate (rather than the "easy" debates like who are your top 3 rookie RBs, etc.).

And I listen to plenty and have agreed with you, Phaded, many others, many times before. I also am in the camp (and know I am not alone) that thinks adding X2 or such small posts clutter up a thread and add little. I would rather allow people with a strong opinion duke it out. And in that spirit there have been countless times I just lurk in a thread and agree with one side or the other. If I'm out for blood when I'm in the ring it's never personal, Remember where you are - this is Thunderdome

Undervalued in subjective. I actually think that the fact that there is debate about Carson being a solution to Seattle's running problem makes him overvalued. I have thought the entire off-season that Carson was overvalued, because until the draft, people were talking as if he could be the starter, and that was baked into his price. His value has simply come back to in and around where it should be, really, IMO. The odds are extremely low that a 7th round pick a year ago would be viewed as such by a team who then proceeded to spend their first round pick (without a 2nd round pick) on a RB makes that pretty obvious, I would think. The consensus thinking Penny doesn't in of itself make Carson undervalued. Penny should be the consensus view as the Hawks starting RB.

[jman3134]

Carson looked way better than his draft pedigree a year ago. Actual NFL experience usurps pedigree. Given, the sample size from a season ago was too small to say anything with complete certainty. The eye test doesn't lie in this case imho though.

Yes, situationally, there will be pressure to play Penny. But, it is far from guaranteed that he has the spot as a rookie if Carson comes in and takes it with significantly improved play, as beat writers are suggesting.

[FantasyFreak]

Carson looked way better than his draft pedigree a year ago. Actual NFL experience usurps pedigree. Given, the sample size from a season ago was too small to say anything with complete certainty. The eye test doesn't lie in this case imho though.

Yes, situationally, there will be pressure to play Penny. But, it is far from guaranteed that he has the spot as a rookie if Carson comes in and takes it with significantly improved play, as beat writers are suggesting.

Apparently the GM and coach really didn't feel that way. Penny was drafted after Carson supposedly passed an eye test (that is supposedly objective???)...The reality is that Rashaad Penny is viewed as a superior player to Carson by the Seahawks Brass, and they are most likely right. Basically all Penny has to do is what he's asked to do, and he's the guy. I don't understand the argument around here about this. It's a non issue unless something drastic happens. I think it's delusional by beat reporters and anyone else to suggest in June/July that Carson should be the favourite, or even have a good chance at being the lead back. There is no validity to it. The second Penny got drafted he was the favourite to get the most significant touches by a country mile. So, while there is a "chance" that Carson starts, it''s not a good chance, that's just the reality of this situation.

[Pet_Smith]

Understood but it fleshes out debate about fringe players. The undervalued players where the consensus goes the other way are a huge edge in this game. Maybe I stir the pot a little but still, I usually have to be poked before I poke back. Also, the more people who disagree the better, it's fun. Then we can see who was right. I am not trolling, if people subconsciously disagree with me because of delivery but then it turns out I was factually correct, then they missed out. And if I am wrong I will eat it, I have before and will again because these are the fun areas to debate (rather than the "easy" debates like who are your top 3 rookie RBs, etc.).

And I listen to plenty and have agreed with you, Phaded, many others, many times before. I also am in the camp (and know I am not alone) that thinks adding X2 or such small posts clutter up a thread and add little. I would rather allow people with a strong opinion duke it out. And in that spirit there have been countless times I just lurk in a thread and agree with one side or the other. If I'm out for blood when I'm in the ring it's never personal, Remember where you are - this is Thunderdome

I think Valhalla makes a very valid point, and I could certainly see how people would react that way - but all this thread has done has make me go back and review Carson's tape from last year. There are ways in which to express an opinion, and I have to say I've got totally swept along with your strength of conviction and and well constructed points.

Now I'm as guilty as most of only having minimal replies to threads, but I think I'm just a man of few words (I also get bounced back by firewalls at work on every other post I try to make so just give up). So how do I see Carson/Penny? I was actually surprised by the speed Carson was playing at last year. Very quick to the holes, and decisive in his cuts, but played with good power. I can certainly seeing him having a bigger role than people expect. You can see coaches who feel like they need to justify their draft picks, so Penny is going to be heavily involved too, and just on probability will likely have the larger share, but I'm going to go and see whether the Carson owner in my league feels like a trade...

[_yeti]

Understood but it fleshes out debate about fringe players. The undervalued players where the consensus goes the other way are a huge edge in this game. Maybe I stir the pot a little but still, I usually have to be poked before I poke back. Also, the more people who disagree the better, it's fun. Then we can see who was right. I am not trolling, if people subconsciously disagree with me because of delivery but then it turns out I was factually correct, then they missed out. And if I am wrong I will eat it, I have before and will again because these are the fun areas to debate (rather than the "easy" debates like who are your top 3 rookie RBs, etc.).

And I listen to plenty and have agreed with you, Phaded, many others, many times before. I also am in the camp (and know I am not alone) that thinks adding X2 or such small posts clutter up a thread and add little. I would rather allow people with a strong opinion duke it out. And in that spirit there have been countless times I just lurk in a thread and agree with one side or the other. If I'm out for blood when I'm in the ring it's never personal, Remember where you are - this is Thunderdome

I think Valhalla makes a very valid point, and I could certainly see how people would react that way - but all this thread has done has make me go back and review Carson's tape from last year. There are ways in which to express an opinion, and I have to say I've got totally swept along with your strength of conviction and and well constructed points.

Now I'm as guilty as most of only having minimal replies to threads, but I think I'm just a man of few words (I also get bounced back by firewalls at work on every other post I try to make so just give up). So how do I see Carson/Penny? I was actually surprised by the speed Carson was playing at last year. Very quick to the holes, and decisive in his cuts, but played with good power. I can certainly seeing him having a bigger role than people expect. You can see coaches who feel like they need to justify their draft picks, so Penny is going to be heavily involved too, and just on probability will likely have the larger share, but I'm going to go and see whether the Carson owner in my league feels like a trade...

Right on man. Among the things you can't teach, two that come to mind are size and speed. This is such an example of people getting set on a player and wanting him to fail so they can be right.

Over and over I hear the same knock against him: draft capital (7th round) and subsequent draft moves (1st round RB). People need to stop pretending that is the easy answer to everything. Over and over we project team need and how often do they go another route. Has it crossed anyone's mind that maybe Seattle WANTS to take a committee approach?

Two questions:
1) why are the only possibilities that Carson is a three down back or Penny is a three down back?
2) what are the knocks on Carson's rookie tape that says he will not get significant run this year? (and continue to hold utility in the league as such, on Seattle or elsewhere)

additionally: people will be still high on a back like Duke Johnson because of contract and last year when they brought in TWO RBs. A starter and a high draft pick, but people point to the contract so Duke must be in line for a significant PPR role (so holds value). And draft capital speaks the same, it MUST tell the whole story. The organization is saying Carson is in line for a significant role, but that must be lies. The same type of thought that says Duke holds value should apply to Carson, no? Mind you, after the draft Carson was being looked at as chopped liver and that's the state where I made this post. The re-ignition of some hype wasn't there, at least on this forum that I saw.

It often crashes, but choo chooo I'm driving the Carson hype train, don't hate me, I love you all

[FantasyFreak]

Understood but it fleshes out debate about fringe players. The undervalued players where the consensus goes the other way are a huge edge in this game. Maybe I stir the pot a little but still, I usually have to be poked before I poke back. Also, the more people who disagree the better, it's fun. Then we can see who was right. I am not trolling, if people subconsciously disagree with me because of delivery but then it turns out I was factually correct, then they missed out. And if I am wrong I will eat it, I have before and will again because these are the fun areas to debate (rather than the "easy" debates like who are your top 3 rookie RBs, etc.).

And I listen to plenty and have agreed with you, Phaded, many others, many times before. I also am in the camp (and know I am not alone) that thinks adding X2 or such small posts clutter up a thread and add little. I would rather allow people with a strong opinion duke it out. And in that spirit there have been countless times I just lurk in a thread and agree with one side or the other. If I'm out for blood when I'm in the ring it's never personal, Remember where you are - this is Thunderdome

I think Valhalla makes a very valid point, and I could certainly see how people would react that way - but all this thread has done has make me go back and review Carson's tape from last year. There are ways in which to express an opinion, and I have to say I've got totally swept along with your strength of conviction and and well constructed points.

Now I'm as guilty as most of only having minimal replies to threads, but I think I'm just a man of few words (I also get bounced back by firewalls at work on every other post I try to make so just give up). So how do I see Carson/Penny? I was actually surprised by the speed Carson was playing at last year. Very quick to the holes, and decisive in his cuts, but played with good power. I can certainly seeing him having a bigger role than people expect. You can see coaches who feel like they need to justify their draft picks, so Penny is going to be heavily involved too, and just on probability will likely have the larger share, but I'm going to go and see whether the Carson owner in my league feels like a trade...

Right on man. Among the things you can't teach, two that come to mind are size and speed. This is such an example of people getting set on a player and wanting him to fail so they can be right.

Over and over I hear the same knock against him: draft capital (7th round) and subsequent draft moves (1st round RB). People need to stop pretending that is the easy answer to everything. Over and over we project team need and how often do they go another route. Has it crossed anyone's mind that maybe Seattle WANTS to take a committee approach?

Two questions:
1) why are the only possibilities that Carson is a three down back or Penny is a three down back?
2) what are the knocks on Carson's rookie tape that says he will not get significant run this year? (and continue to hold utility in the league as such, on Seattle or elsewhere)

additionally: people will be still high on a back like Duke Johnson because of contract and last year when they brought in TWO RBs. A starter and a high draft pick, but people point to the contract so Duke must be in line for a significant PPR role (so holds value). And draft capital speaks the same, it MUST tell the whole story. The organization is saying Carson is in line for a significant role, but that must be lies. The same type of thought that says Duke holds value should apply to Carson, no? Mind you, after the draft Carson was being looked at as chopped liver and that's the state where I made this post. The re-ignition of some hype wasn't there, at least on this forum that I saw.

It often crashes, but choo chooo I'm driving the Carson hype train, don't hate me, I love you all

Honestly it's not. It's about probabilities. I drafted Penny a lot of places because it's a very high probability based on his production/size speed (like you said, can't be taught) and the fact the Seahawks spent a first round pick on him, that he will be their featured back, and will succeed. The probabilitiy that the Seahawks go with a guy that they got a decent look at last year, that they spent a a 7th round pick on, and then decided to spend their first round pick on a guy at the same position, not so probable. Small Sample sizes with late rounders are difficult to get excited about for me, when the team invests that type of capital in the same position. Jeremy Lanford used to be a thing.

[_yeti]

Honestly it's not. It's about probabilities. I drafted Penny a lot of places because it's a very high probability based on his production/size speed (like you said, can't be taught) and the fact the Seahawks spent a first round pick on him, that he will be their featured back, and will succeed. The probabilitiy that the Seahawks go with a guy that they got a decent look at last year, that they spent a a 7th round pick on, and then decided to spend their first round pick on a guy at the same position, not so probable. Small Sample sizes with late rounders are difficult to get excited about for me, when the team invests that type of capital in the same position. Jeremy Lanford used to be a thing.

I get the draft capital argument and I'm not disregarding that. But what probabilities? Probabilities of backs and teams in this situation? I am all about case-by-case basis, not probabilities as a whole disregarding what the player did or did not do on the field.

My question said what other argument against Carson based on his tape is there besides the draft capital argument. Sample size, ok, but what did he do in that sample size? If you just look at numbers on paper, sure make a comparison to Langford or many others who have shined briefly. But Carson is a completely different style of back than Langford (or Rawls, etc.). Also, not expecting everyone to keep a tally of what we all say, but I am not just pumping every back in Carson's situation, I was down on Langford.

From the DeAndre Washington thread prior to 2016 season:

I am going to be on the clock soon at 2.5, i have a pretty strong core of WR, do i reach for a guy like Washington or Howard (i have Murray/Langford) or do i still go BPA and grab another WR like Boyd, Caroo, Fuller.

I have Washington and hope he gets some burn this year but he wont take the starting spot, likely will just be a 3rd down back.

At first read I expected to say BPA WR then Howard then Washington, but then looking at your roster I would actually go Howard. I think he beats out Langford.. ah but Fuller at 2.5 is pretty decent and I'm low on him. Boyd becomes a decent WR2 but not until 2017. I like Boyd, Fuller, and Howard. Go with your gut

[_yeti]

*edit
This was duplicate to post below

[_yeti]

And I'm not a Penny hater for the record, I tried to trade up and get him (unsuccessfully) in two leagues (because I don't think it has to be a case of either Penny or Carson having success). I think they can both have success.

[FantasyFreak]

Honestly it's not. It's about probabilities. I drafted Penny a lot of places because it's a very high probability based on his production/size speed (like you said, can't be taught) and the fact the Seahawks spent a first round pick on him, that he will be their featured back, and will succeed. The probabilitiy that the Seahawks go with a guy that they got a decent look at last year, that they spent a a 7th round pick on, and then decided to spend their first round pick on a guy at the same position, not so probable. Small Sample sizes with late rounders are difficult to get excited about for me, when the team invests that type of capital in the same position. Jeremy Lanford used to be a thing.

I get the draft capital argument and I'm not disregarding that. But what probabilities? Probabilities of backs and teams in this situation? I am all about case-by-case basis, not probabilities as a whole disregarding what the player did or did not do on the field.

My question said what other argument against Carson based on his tape is there besides the draft capital argument. Sample size, ok, but what did he do in that sample size? If you just look at numbers on paper, sure make a comparison to Langford or many others who have shined briefly. But Carson is a completely different style of back than Langford (or Rawls, etc.). Also, not expecting everyone to keep a tally of what we all say, but I am not just pumping every back in Carson's situation, I was down on Langford.

From the DeAndre Washington thread prior to 2016 season:

I am going to be on the clock soon at 2.5, i have a pretty strong core of WR, do i reach for a guy like Washington or Howard (i have Murray/Langford) or do i still go BPA and grab another WR like Boyd, Caroo, Fuller.

I have Washington and hope he gets some burn this year but he wont take the starting spot, likely will just be a 3rd down back.

At first read I expected to say BPA WR then Howard then Washington, but then looking at your roster I would actually go Howard. I think he beats out Langford.. ah but Fuller at 2.5 is pretty decent and I'm low on him. Boyd becomes a decent WR2 but not until 2017. I like Boyd, Fuller, and Howard. Go with your gut

There are really not a lot of RB's that fail to produce substantially at the college level and then go on to be lengthy starters in the NFL. I remember when C-Mike came in, a gym rat, physical freak, but the college production was lacking as well. It's just not a probable outcome that Carson is a relevant RB in Fantasy for any period of time based on a lot of things. Tape is subjective, and we are amateurs at watching it. I understand you say case by case, but I see a history of players similar to Carson, and they don't usually become anything. Maybe he will, but I doubt it.

[ArrylT]

Sometimes I feel like C-Mike is the obvious punching bag whenever anyone wants to make a point.

https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/pl ... ael-1.html
http://www.nfl.com/draft/2013/profiles/ ... id=2539322

I'd say thats a fair amount of college production - considering one year he had a broken leg in 2010, and he had an ACL tear in 2011.

[_yeti]

Yup, CMike and TRich are basically punching bags for almost any analogy.

As for Carson's college production, he went to JuCo, started one year at Oklahoma State and had a 6.8 ypc average. His lack of college experience might be why he looked better in the pros than college as he did exactly what Seattle asked of him and got much more physical than his college tape. I feel like it is a cop out to say "we are all amateurs" so nothing we see in the game matters. I have said this in other threads, if that is the case why do we talk so much on this site? You don't have to have ever watched football in your life to compare player stats and draft position, that's just statistics.

You base your belief on what you view as probability of success, meanwhile I look for value and try to find something people have missed. I always have fun trying to hit on the right low probability guys. I am not saying he is a top 10 back or something. I am just saying he is being viewed as a backup without value while I see committee back with potential for a step up in his next contract.

[jman3134]

If I say I don't expect a committee, but for Carson to take the job outright midseason, does that make me the ultimate Carson fanboy?

[_yeti]

If I say I don't expect a committee, but for Carson to take the job outright midseason, does that make me the ultimate Carson fanboy?

Yes