Sony Michel to Rams

[stethant]

Well that's interesting.....

 

I was thinking that anyone the Rams brought in would be very unlikely to impact Henderson much, but Michel makes me wonder a bit. Could be good at the goaline and the Rams run at the goalline a ton.

Edited August 25, 2021 by stethant

[Shaft]

This is big news during draft time even if Michel is purely a backup. Henderson has been going in the 4th in some drafts, and Jones drafted late as a lottery ticket. 

[irish]

Looks like Bill really like Stevenson and Taylor. 

[League_Champion]

NE picked the wrong Georgia running back that year. It's hard to believe that he was a first round pick. At least they were able to unload him. 

[League_Champion]

JJ Taylor time? 

[Finn5033]

Seems like all it does is muddy the waters for the Rams, and doesn’t really change my interest in drafting either of the Patriots options either.

[irish]

2 hours ago, League_Champion said:

JJ Taylor time? 

He's more like James White. Stevenson is just chomping at the bit to split with Harris and get GL work. 

[League_Champion]

Just now, irish said:

He's more like James White. Stevenson is just chomping at the bit to split with Harris and get GL work. 

 

Yeah, I guess you're right. I wouldn't touch any of them right now. 

[irish]

3 minutes ago, League_Champion said:

 

Yeah, I guess you're right. I wouldn't touch any of them right now. 

Nope, the price would have to be pretty cheap. It would take an injury to peek my interest. 

[darin3]

1 hour ago, Finn5033 said:

Seems like all it does is muddy the waters for the Rams, and doesn’t really change my interest in drafting either of the Patriots options either.

 

Yup, same here.  Henderson will still be the primary-esque guy but Michel will get work too.  And the Pats still have Harris, Stevenson and the two scat backs.

 

Muddy all around.

[Gopher]

Henderson is much more effective as a complimentary back.  He's had opportunities to be the "lead" back before, but he's not suited for it.  At 5'8" and barely 200 lbs, he's surpassed 15 carries in a game just once in his career.  Anybody who is drafting him thinking he's going to be some sort of workhorse is kidding themselves.  

[stevegrab]

Last year 3 RB for the Rams split the lions share (over 80%) of the nearly 475 rushing attempts. Akers (145) is out, Brown (101) is gone to MIA, that leaves Henderson and Michel plus scrubs/rookies. Henderson may not be the workhorse, but he's going to get a lot of touches. 

 

Both LAR and NE RB situations are hard to gauge now, Rams has a lot of change including a new QB, Pats are the curse of BB. 

[darin3]

44 minutes ago, Gopher said:

Henderson is much more effective as a complimentary back.  He's had opportunities to be the "lead" back before, but he's not suited for it.  At 5'8" and barely 200 lbs, he's surpassed 15 carries in a game just once in his career.  Anybody who is drafting him thinking he's going to be some sort of workhorse is kidding themselves.  

 

While this may be true, Henderson can catch the ball... and even if he gets 10-12 carries a game, add that to 3ish catches a game and you're looking at a nice flex play or lower-end RB2.  I really like this Rams offense.  They're gonna score some points.

[Gopher]

13 minutes ago, stevegrab said:

Last year 3 RB for the Rams split the lions share (over 80%) of the nearly 475 rushing attempts. Akers (145) is out, Brown (101) is gone to MIA, that leaves Henderson and Michel plus scrubs/rookies. Henderson may not be the workhorse, but he's going to get a lot of touches. 

 

Right.  What I'm saying is that Akers and Henderson are different backs, yet people are drafting Henderson as if he's just the "next man up" now that Akers is out.  Akers averaged 21.5 carriers per game over the last 4 games last year.  Henderson has never has 21 carries in a single game, much less averaged that for any period of time.  The Rams don't want to use Henderson in the same way that they used Akers.  It's not sustainable.  It's more likely that Michel or Jones get 20+ carries in a game than Henderson.  They want to use Henderson in the manner in which he's most effective, which is splitting time with another back, where Henderson gets 10-12 carries and a handful of targets per game.  

 

Another way of looking at it.  It is very likely that the Rams have been planning on adding another back ever since Akers went down.  They've been treating Henderson as though he's in a protective bubble this entire pre-season, and he still got hurt (hand injury).  That is a major concern for the Rams, who decided to sign someone sooner than later (and actually spent two conditional picks to do so, rather than just waiting and signing somebody who gets cut elsewhere).  They know that Henderson isn't built to be more than a timeshare back.  

[Gopher]

5 minutes ago, darin3 said:

 

While this may be true, Henderson can catch the ball... and even if he gets 10-12 carries a game, add that to 3ish catches a game and you're looking at a nice flex play or lower-end RB2.  I really like this Rams offense.  They're gonna score some points.

I don't disagree with any of that, except I think he's more of a flex than a RB2.  If I'm starting him as my RB2 in a league that requires 2 RB, I'm looking for better options.    

[boltnlava]

Sony has a new lease on life and MAY show what he showed earlier in NE. He could be option 1 with Henderson being a 3rd down back. While I doubt this,  it is within the realm. Henderson has shown he is not a true #1.  I do realize that Bill's castaways never seem to do as good or better under new management. I took a flier as a looksee. 

[stevegrab]

3 hours ago, Gopher said:

Right.  What I'm saying is that Akers and Henderson are different backs, yet people are drafting Henderson as if he's just the "next man up" now that Akers is out.  Akers averaged 21.5 carriers per game over the last 4 games last year.  Henderson has never has 21 carries in a single game, much less averaged that for any period of time.  The Rams don't want to use Henderson in the same way that they used Akers.  It's not sustainable.  It's more likely that Michel or Jones get 20+ carries in a game than Henderson.  They want to use Henderson in the manner in which he's most effective, which is splitting time with another back, where Henderson gets 10-12 carries and a handful of targets per game.  

 

Another way of looking at it.  It is very likely that the Rams have been planning on adding another back ever since Akers went down.  They've been treating Henderson as though he's in a protective bubble this entire pre-season, and he still got hurt (hand injury).  That is a major concern for the Rams, who decided to sign someone sooner than later (and actually spent two conditional picks to do so, rather than just waiting and signing somebody who gets cut elsewhere).  They know that Henderson isn't built to be more than a timeshare back.  

 

I am not saying Henderson is a direct replacement for Akers, or will get as many carries. You seem to be picking the best of Akers stats with his "average of 21.5 carries in last 4 games", what was it the rest of the season? (I see 2 weeks with no stats, and about 60 carries total in the other 7, or less than 10 carries per game average.)  Yet you skip over good stats by Henderson "he only surpassed 15 carries once" right but he also has 15 twice, 14 once and 12 twice, well above his average (9.2 carries per game, Akers had 11.2 or 2 more on average).  

 

Again I am not trying to say he is a lead back, or will get 20 carries per game. I'm just saying he could still have a lot of value. Sure Michel is probably the lead back now, and maybe Jones will do well to. But Henderson isn't going to be #3 option either. 

 

Maybe its a matter of perspective, RB are very hard to find in my league, I've always struggled to have even 2 decent starters (not studs, but guys that got the bulk of carries for the team). So looking at guys that may be option #2 is something I have to rely on.

 

But then I rarely win the league so what then hell do I know.  

[Gopher]

1 minute ago, stevegrab said:

 

I am not saying Henderson is a direct replacement for Akers, or will get as many carries. You seem to be picking the best of Akers stats with his "average of 21.5 carries in last 4 games", what was it the rest of the season? (I see 2 weeks with no stats, and about 60 carries total in the other 7, or less than 10 carries per game average.)  Yet you skip over good stats by Henderson "he only surpassed 15 carries once" right but he also has 15 twice, 14 once and 12 twice, well above his average (9.2 carries per game, Akers had 11.2 or 2 more on average).  

 

Again I am not trying to say he is a lead back, or will get 20 carries per game. I'm just saying he could still have a lot of value. Sure Michel is probably the lead back now, and maybe Jones will do well to. But Henderson isn't going to be #3 option either. 

 

Maybe its a matter of perspective, RB are very hard to find in my league, I've always struggled to have even 2 decent starters (not studs, but guys that got the bulk of carries for the team). So looking at guys that may be option #2 is something I have to rely on.

 

But then I rarely win the league so what then hell do I know.  

Towards the end of last year, the Rams really started to feed Akers the ball, in what I would consider to be a "workhorse" fashion.  As a result, Akers was projected/ranked pretty high, going into this season.  All I'm saying is that Henderson isn't going to be that type of workhorse.  I'm not saying Michel or Jones will be either.  Most likely, it's going to be a split between at least two of them, if not all three.  That said, I agree... true RB1's are hard to come by.  I'm certainly not saying don't draft Henderson.  I just don't think he'll be what Akers might have been (hypothetically, had he stayed on the field).  Maybe that's stating the obvious.  

 

As far as cherry-picking stats, I just used the games where Akers actually played substantially.  Of course, when he barely saw the field, he didn't do much.  When he did, he was a borderline stud.  Meanwhile, Henderson saw the field pretty consistently all year long, but his production fluctuated quite a bit, mainly because he's a bit more reception/TD dependent than Akers is.  

[stevegrab]

Just now, Gopher said:

Towards the end of last year, the Rams really started to feed Akers the ball, in what I would consider to be a "workhorse" fashion.  As a result, Akers was projected/ranked pretty high, going into this season.  All I'm saying is that Henderson isn't going to be that type of workhorse.  I'm not saying Michel or Jones will be either.  Most likely, it's going to be a split between at least two of them, if not all three.  That said, I agree... true RB1's are hard to come by.  I'm certainly not saying don't draft Henderson.  I just don't think he'll be what Akers might have been (hypothetically, had he stayed on the field).  Maybe that's stating the obvious.  

 

As far as cherry-picking stats, I just used the games where Akers actually played substantially.  Of course, when he barely saw the field, he didn't do much.  When he did, he was a borderline stud.  Meanwhile, Henderson saw the field pretty consistently all year long, but his production fluctuated quite a bit, mainly because he's a bit more reception/TD dependent than Akers is.  

 

Yep, I don't think any RB they can acquire was going to do what Akers was expected to. Sorry if I got a bit testy.

[PotentialNobody]

[PotentialNobody]

51 minutes ago, LordOpie said:

or...

the NFL Team knows you need more than one good RB?

The Opie may not think Eliot Crist is as smart as you think he is?

It’s just an opinion. 
 

Just like how the huddle members may not think Opie is as smart as he thinks he is.

[FWmaker]

I was mildly surprised that the Rams spent some draft picks on Sony. I would've thought they would've picked up a veteran RB looking for work and save the Draft Capital

[stethant]

5 hours ago, FWmaker said:

I was mildly surprised that the Rams spent some draft picks on Sony. I would've thought they would've picked up a veteran RB looking for work and save the Draft Capital

The Rams have never been too high on draft capital - they spend it like water.

[purplemonster]

9 minutes ago, LordOpie said:

This is what successful teams do. Draft picks are a gamble

The Patriots??  They have always been accumulating draft picks 

[squirrelmastr21]

15 hours ago, LordOpie said:

or...

the NFL Team knows you need more than one good RB?

The Opie may not think Eliot Crist is as smart as you think he is?

McVay stated he wants to emulate the 49ers with multiple RBs.