Opinion: Christine Michael to become hot trade target.

[cacksman]

I think that was in the preseason. He had a couple drops then, his playing time dwindled to nothing, and people speculated that it was because of the fumbles. He started to get some significant carries against Arizona, then fumbled again, and only got one more carry the rest of the season. It's all about the ball . . . Carroll doesn't like fumbling. Hopefully ball security is something he will continue to improve on because, if he does, he has a unique skill set to contribute dynamic plays to this offense as both a runner and receiver out of the backfield.

Pre-season week 2 vs Chargers

The only time I've seen him come in is 1 or two plays was to give Lynch a break. Otherwise, he had a couple of good plays in garbage time, then celebrates like world's on fire. Overrated. Robert Turbin has been so much better at being a workhorse. Christine Michael will never be a feature back. He can't run in between the numbers without a clean lane or a fumble.

This post is a joke.

Michael's carries this year:
When tied/behind: 16 carries
When leading: 18 carries.

But we shouldn't let stats get in the way of a good old fashioned ignorant rant.

 

[cacksman]

It's kind of interesting. I can't recall if it was at OTA's or Training Camp last season, but I remember an interview where Carroll said Michael was the most improved player on the team. Then he went on to have 34 carries last season.

Personally, I think the fumbles in the preseason played a part in that. I was also surprised when they didn't integrate him into the game plan after the Harvin trade.

Well they couldn't take carries away from Lynch at that point, because the narrative had been how Seattle was crazy for not running Lynch, and there were all sorts of reports of him being unhappy at that time. Turbin has always been the passing game back, so there just hasn't been opportunities for anyone else to get carries. Jeremy Hill (the best rookie RB) would not have received more carries on Seattle than Michael did last year.

 

[vin.couve12]

There isn't a RB in this year's draft that could come in and start over either of our backups at this point. Gordon turned in a pretty average combine and while Gurley's 40 time would be good, he won't be nearly as successful at the NFL level as he was in college. Gurley has little short area explosion. He'll be forced to change direction more at the NFL level because those huge holes won't be there where he can show off his strait line speed.

Trading Michael is a very, very bad idea. If he came out this year he'd be far and away the most physically talented back in this draft and it's not even close.

 

[Rat]

Jeremy Hill (the best rookie RB) would not have received more carries on Seattle than Michael did last year.

Seems extremely unlikely that he would not have earned more playing time than Michael. Probably much more.

Michael doesn't just get limited action, he gets next to none. Our coaching staff wouldn't keep him on the bench/inactive list so much if we were earning playing time.

 

[vin.couve12]

At this point, IF Lynch were to retire, the RB we'd likely end up drafting would be Trey Williams who would probably ride the pine quite a bit as a pure RB, but would instantly be our primary returner and also possibly get on the field some as a potential mismatch piece. We'd platoon the #1 duties with Turbo and Michael and Williams would be the 3rd string guy.

 

[vin.couve12]

Jeremy Hill (the best rookie RB) would not have received more carries on Seattle than Michael did last year.

Seems extremely unlikely that he would not have earned more playing time than Michael. Probably much more.

Michael doesn't just get limited action, he gets next to none. Our coaching staff wouldn't keep him on the bench/inactive list so much if we were earning playing time.

Right, because you take the best RB in the NFL off the field for Jeremy Hill....

 

[vin.couve12]

Many folks, not just Seahawks fans, seem to think it's inevitable that we draft a RB this year if Lynch retires, but if you do that you have to believe that you get a net gain over what you already have. I don't think I see that in this year's draft. However, what we could do is add a player to the lineup who's a little bit different than what we have. Almost like a Brian Westbrook type who's got a lot of experience as a returner and is also very explosive.

[youtube]uicc56tcYbs[/youtube]

He can be had in the late 3rd and maybe even 4th round. The problem is that he's a legitimate returner and many teams think that if you can get a player who gets you points strictly on special teams then you take them. That said, he'll probably be had in the 3rd round. That would give us the ability to draft OL or WR or maybe even DL in the first two rounds.

 

[Seahawk Sailor]

If memory serves correctly, that picture was snapped just after a massive hit where the Charger defender slammed his helmet directly into the ball. Every back fumbles in that type of situation.

And the reason he hasn't had as many carries as some people would like? He's backing up a near-consensus, best-in-the-league running back. How many running backs in the league would take more snaps than that away from a guy they call Beast Mode?

As far as Michael becoming a "hot trade target"? Meh, I don't see it. Teams in need can easily pick a running back up in the draft, and there are other good running backs on the market right now in free agency. Just because he has two more years running behind Marshawn Lynch doesn't mean they'll be any different than the last two years running behind Marshawn Lynch.

 

[Rat]

Jeremy Hill (the best rookie RB) would not have received more carries on Seattle than Michael did last year.

Seems extremely unlikely that he would not have earned more playing time than Michael. Probably much more.

Michael doesn't just get limited action, he gets next to none. Our coaching staff wouldn't keep him on the bench/inactive list so much if we were earning playing time.

Right, because you take the best RB in the NFL off the field for Jeremy Hill....

Lynch isn't on the field every play. Lots of teams have great RBs and still have other guys earn playing time, and none of those teams are as run-leaning as this team is. Michael doesn't just get little PT, he gets next to none. Maybe I'm naive, but I have a hard time believing our coaches would keep someone off the field if he had shown he actually deserved to be on it.

 

[chris98251]

What has he done in the NFL in 2 yrs, NOTHING, could not take the #2 spot from Turbin. If there is a back that may have a low round pick trade value it would be Turbin.

 

[rideaducati]

The thing is why is CM considered a fumble prone player? I mean i hear people on this forum and radio mentioning this and make it sound like he is fumbling every other touch.

I remember seeing at least two that he fumbled and got back himself. With as few carries as he was given throughout the season, two fumbles is a lot.

 

[Chukarhawk]

C mike has to be in the doghouse. back to back superbowls and he doesn't see the field. Ouch

 

[DavidSeven]

You would be lucky to net a sixth rounder for him. More likely, a team would just wait for him to get cut if they thought Seattle didn't want him. Regardless of how much we like him or not, he is Just A Guy to those around the league. This is a team that featured a CFL WR heavily in the Super Bowl, even though he previously never caught a pass in the NFL. The fact that Michael can't get snaps here is going to be a huge red flag for other teams, as it should be. The fact this team would rather give a 29yo RB $12M rather than rely on C-Mike is also a big tell.

 

[Hasselbeck]

No one is giving up a 2nd round pick for him. So that fact alone kind of renders this entire topic moot.

 

[kearly]

Cool post...should we bring up everytime you've changed your mind? Honestly, whats the point of this? Kearlys opinion of a player may have changed over the course of a year, get over it.

I don't remember ever saying we should trade Lynch just to trade him, but I did think it would be worth hearing offers. In August of last year it was pretty obvious that Seattle did not have Lynch in their 2015 plans. Lynch was holding out, and Seattle let him until he came back with his tail between his legs. It seemed very clear that the team's 3 year model didn't have Lynch in 2016, and maybe not in 2015 either. For a 'rental' guy with two good backups, it made sense to hear offers. If someone had offered Seattle a 1st rounder for Marshawn last August, I think they'd have taken it.

Of course, things changed. Lynch went on to have an amazing 2014 season, the kind that makes you think he's nowhere near hitting his career wall. Now the FO wants to lock him up, and so do I. Lynch is making a case as a historically good RB right now. Seattle would be crazy not to ride that as long as they can.

I am not as enamored with Michael as I used to be, but I still think he is a playmaker. Golden Tate had his flaws. Kearse has flaws. Seattle is all about acquiring playmakers with flaws. Michael is one of them. I would like to see how many plays he could make if you gave him 250-300 touches in a season. I think Turbin is a good back, but probably only a league average starter as of today. I think he is also much more suited to be a #2 back than Michael, which factors. Turbin is also a free agent after 2015.

 

[HawKnPeppa]

What has he done in the NFL in 2 yrs, NOTHING, could not take the #2 spot from Turbin. If there is a back that may have a low round pick trade value it would be Turbin.

Exactly. And for the people citing what PC said about Michael's 'most improved' status in pre-season, that was most likely a casual observation compared to what Cable saw. Cable's assessment wasn't nearly as rosey as Pete's. Bottom line is, Cable evaluates and decides the pecking order of our RB's and Michael obviously has not shown him enough of what he wants to see to displace Turbin.

 

[Hawk-Lock]

He's not a hot commodity. If we could get a 4th or a 5th rounder I'd be more than happy, but at this point I'm not even sure teams would give up a 5th rounder for him. I'm pretty disappointed in how the CM pick has turned out, still not really sure why we even drafted him in the first place.

 

[Bob Loblaw]

CM was a fumbler in college, thats why he is labeled that. No way he will be a hot commodity with all the RB talent coming out this year. You can get a better RB cheaper and younger and dont have to give a possible draft pick for CMike. He either competes and earns a role or he is cut sooner than later. He is turning out to be a worse draft pick than LaMichael James

 

[Sgt. Largent]

I don't know about "hot" trade target but I could see the Hawks entertaining offers. Not sure if we could get more than a 5th rounder for him, seeing as he's been riding the bench for two years............and more importantly has ZERO value on special teams.

Which is the most surprising thing to me about Michael, he should at least be a Leon Washington type backup........where he's your 3rd stringer but is fantastic on KR and/or PR.

Confusing as to why Pete hasn't tried to develop Michael into at least a KR. He has all the traits of being a good one.

 

[hawknation2014]

I don't know about "hot" trade target but I could see the Hawks entertaining offers. Not sure if we could get more than a 5th rounder for him, seeing as he's been riding the bench for two years............and more importantly has ZERO value on special teams.

Which is the most surprising thing to me about Michael, he should at least be a Leon Washington type backup........where he's your 3rd stringer but is fantastic on KR and/or PR.

Confusing as to why Pete hasn't tried to develop Michael into at least a KR. He has all the traits of being a good one.

I would guess ball security would reason No. 1. Suspiciously, he also didn't return at all in college.