Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

slaughterrt

Michael Bush 2012 Season Outlook

171 posts in this topic

I know I just posted in the roster help section of the boards about Michael Bush. I have him on my dynasty team and am hoping he lands somewhere where he will be the primary back. He certainly showed last season that he can shoulder the load...and he deserves the opportunity to compete for number one RB spot. He will likely not get a shot at top RB in Oakland with a healthy DMC...and it's doubtful the Raiders will pay him what he deserves, just to backup DMC. Anyway...where do you expect he will go?

There are plenty of RB-starved teams such as Cleveland, Cincinnati, NY Jets, Indy, maybe TB and maybe St Louis. However...NONE of these teams are in position to make a deep playoff run (maybe the Bengals but since they are in a very competitive conference, I don't know). Anyway, it seems to me that the BEST team with a lack of RB would be the GREEN BAY PACKERS. Now I am not a Packers fan (opposite actually, I am a VIKINGS fan), but the Packers certainly do not have a powerful running game (true, they don't really need it). However, I think Bush would be a great addition to the Packers run game. I think Bush would be happy there, and he would get paid (I assume...but I am not familiar with the Packer's salary cap situation) and he would get the chance to play for the big one.

I want Bush to succeed (especially since I have him on my dynasty league) and I think that the best fit for him would be GB.

Whattayathink?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I also own bush in a dynasty league. I would love to see him I'm green bay.....could make him a top 10 RB in ppr leagues. I doubt that happens but I do think there is an excellent chance bush ends up with a starting job some where next year......and that does excite me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, I would be good with that too. I know McFadden's proneness to injuries would definitely make me think twice about letting Bush walk. And with the way Bush played this season, he can definitely handle what Oakland throws at him. That would be an interesting scenario, and one that I hadn't even considered. I wonder what the Raiders could get for McFadden. He is a beast when he he healthy. Whatever happens, I hope Bush gets his chance to shine somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is Bush this hot commodity? What makes him a stud in waiting? Is he young? No. Is he the best fa available? No. Has he rushed for an impressive ypc as the backup (like Turner in SD)? No. Did he perform like a stud when DMC went down last year? No. He got a bunch of touches and didn't get hurt. He looked good catching the ball but that's it. And folks think there's an "excellent" chance he's going to start somewhere?

Fantasy dreams are killing this guy's value. Don't believe the hype. He's a mediocre rb who's going to be the backup for some team. His upside is what it was last year - the starter gets hurt and he stays healthy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you considered the scenario that the Raiders trade McFadden and keep Bush?

I've also considered the scenario that the Chargers trade Matthews and go with Tolbert. And the scenario where the Eagles trade McCoy and roll with Lewis. Then I laughed it off as being a waste of time based in fantasy land. McFadden has injury problems but he's been amazing when healthy. Thinking the Raiders would dump DMC to give the ball to Bush is insane and not based in reality. The local writer suggested the Raiders look into trading him because they have few draft picks and a lot of holes. That's where this rumor came from and it's been dismissed by all parties as being a total fabrication.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've also considered the scenario that the Chargers trade Matthews and go with Tolbert. And the scenario where the Eagles trade McCoy and roll with Lewis. Then I laughed it off as being a waste of time based in fantasy land. McFadden has injury problems but he's been amazing when healthy. Thinking the Raiders would dump DMC to give the ball to Bush is insane and not based in reality. The local writer suggested the Raiders look into trading him because they have few draft picks and a lot of holes. That's where this rumor came from and it's been dismissed by all parties as being a total fabrication.

He's been amazing when healthy and they are installing an offense that doesn't cater to him. I am yet to see the Raiders or any party dismiss the possibility of McFadden being traded. And the scenarios you posted are asinine and moronic. Bush is better than Tolbert and Lewis

Michael Bush would have been a first round pick had he not broken his leg in his senior season.

And given that Foster, Rice, and Forte are all likely to get tagged Bush is likely the best RB that is actually going to hit the market.

New offensive coordinator Greg Knapp is expected to install a zone-blocking scheme in Oakland.

Darren McFadden never flourished under former coach Tom Cable's zone-blocking scheme, only emerging once Hue Jackson molded the offense to his strengths. ESPN's John Clayton suggests the Raiders will have to decide whether to re-sign free agent Michael Bush
or
trade McFadden this offseason. Knapp has been a decidedly run-heavy play-caller, though it's odd that the Raiders are now installing an offense that won't cater to the skills of its most dynamic player. Beat writer Steve Corkran suggested last week that McFadden could be dangled as a trade chip for new GM Reggie McKenzie.
Feb 2 - 6:57 PM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, it's just beat writers totally making up a story. Thanks to ESPN and new media, 'journalists' often throw crap at the wall so when one of the thousand things they predict come true they can shout they were first. This did not come from any source or any rumor. The beat writer needed to kill time and a story so he made up the scenario. Of COURSE the scenarios I presented are moronic. So is the DMC getting traded scenario. That's my point. You're free to speculate (it's largeley what we all do in the offseason). But do not act as though there is even a shred of fact or rumors behind this.

Who cares where he would have been drafted? He's been in the league four years. At this point it doesn't matter if he would have been the #1 overall pick save injury. We should base things off what he's actually shown in the NFL. Lots of players get drafted higher/lower than they should. Once you have more than a couple years playing in the league it's safe to toss your draft spot (or fictional draft spot) out the window.

I agree those guys are likely to be tagged/signed. That leaves us with comparable players in Tolbert and Hillis. Both are a year younger than Bush and have put up very comparable numbers to Bush. And let's not forget every single year there are a few rookie running backs to get drafted and steal carries/starting jobs. Heck, Ryan Grant is a free agent as well (but he's 29).

Michael Bush has a career ypc of 4.2. That's certainly not elite. And Bush being better than Tolbert/Lewis? Might want to actually look at the stats before making that statement. Facts have a way of dumping reality into things.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Installing an offense that isn't tailored for him (McFadden)? That seems to imply Bush is somehow a better fit. Unless the offense you're installing is stay healthy, take the ball, stumble for 4 yards and a cloud of dust, there's no way McFadden isn't a better fit. DMC is still only 24 years old and while the health is undoubtedly a concern, he's been worlds better than Bush when they're on the field. Oakland can find another backup to replace Bush. They'll have a much harder time finding someone to replace the explosiveness McFadden offers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bush is better than Tolbert/Lewis but he ain't near DMC. They would be wise to keep Bush considering the fact that DMC is made of glass...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bush is better than Tolbert/Lewis

They're surprisingly comparable. Tolbert career ypc? 4.1. Bush career ypc? 4.2. (Lewis is better but extremely small sample size).

Yards per catch? Tolbert: 9.3. Bush: 9.7

Offensive lines undoubtedly play a much bigger role than most of us likely realize. But when you're getting significantly outplayed by your teammate it shows a combination of your teammate being really good and you not being so great. If Bush had a different name he'd be largely ignored. Plenty of guys carry a load when the starter gets hurt only to return to obscurity the following year. I think Bush will help out whatever team he signs with but I'll be absolutely shocked if he becomes the starter in the NFL (barring injury).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're surprisingly comparable. Tolbert career ypc? 4.1. Bush career ypc? 4.2. (Lewis is better but extremely small sample size).

Yards per catch? Tolbert: 9.3. Bush: 9.7

Offensive lines undoubtedly play a much bigger role than most of us likely realize. But when you're getting significantly outplayed by your teammate it shows a combination of your teammate being really good and you not being so great. If Bush had a different name he'd be largely ignored. Plenty of guys carry a load when the starter gets hurt only to return to obscurity the following year. I think Bush will help out whatever team he signs with but I'll be absolutely shocked if he becomes the starter in the NFL (barring injury).

right but that only tells a fraction of the story

for all we know Bush woulda ran 5 yards a carry on San Diego or Vice Versa.

Completely different systems

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

right but that only tells a fraction of the story

for all we know Bush woulda ran 5 yards a carry on San Diego or Vice Versa.

Completely different systems

What's your point? The only difference is playing the Raiders vs. the Chargers? Can we never compare players from different teams because it's "completely different systems"? Should we ignore DMC running circles around whatever Michael Bush does?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is Bush this hot commodity? What makes him a stud in waiting? Is he young? No. Is he the best fa available? No. Has he rushed for an impressive ypc as the backup (like Turner in SD)? No. Did he perform like a stud when DMC went down last year? No. He got a bunch of touches and didn't get hurt. He looked good catching the ball but that's it. And folks think there's an "excellent" chance he's going to start somewhere?

Fantasy dreams are killing this guy's value. Don't believe the hype. He's a mediocre rb who's going to be the backup for some team. His upside is what it was last year - the starter gets hurt and he stays healthy.

They're surprisingly comparable. Tolbert career ypc? 4.1. Bush career ypc? 4.2. (Lewis is better but extremely small sample size).

Yards per catch? Tolbert: 9.3. Bush: 9.7

Offensive lines undoubtedly play a much bigger role than most of us likely realize. But when you're getting significantly outplayed by your teammate it shows a combination of your teammate being really good and you not being so great. If Bush had a different name he'd be largely ignored. Plenty of guys carry a load when the starter gets hurt only to return to obscurity the following year. I think Bush will help out whatever team he signs with but I'll be absolutely shocked if he becomes the starter in the NFL (barring injury).

Wow.

So because Tolbert has more yards per CATCH as a RB, that means he's better? Hilarious.Their ypc career career numbers are similar, yet they have faced COMPLETELY different teams and run defenses in their career, so that's a terrible way to compare the two players as well.

There is much more context that goes into comparing two players, but I will save that for the people that will actually understand it. Just know that your opinion of Bush is amazingly off. Bush did a fantastic job once McFadden went down last season in week 7. From week 7 on, Bush's per game averages were 21 carries for 83 yds per game, with .4 td per game. That's being a productive bell cow. In fact, in reality, I would probably take Bush over McFadden in real life. Less injury concern, more reliable churning out yards and gaining positive yardage on a per play basis, cheaper...McFadden is the sexy pick to people that only know fantasy football like you (I know this is a fantasy football site), but sometimes there is more to grading a player than "how many yards did he put up in that game"

Michael Bush would be an animal in many NFL offenses if given the chance.

No I've never owned Michael Bush and don't have any bias towards him. I just laugh at the way some people have opinions. At least inform yourself first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure anyone was suggesting Bush is an elite talent. We are talking fantasy football and has been pretty close to elite when it comes to putting up fantasy points. Some teams have real bad starting rbs and Bush would be an upgrade for many teams. He seems to be durable and can do a little bit of everything. I think he is starting somewhere next year and since he can be an every down RB....yeah, I like his potential a lot

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know Mendenhall's contract situation, but my knee jerk, crystal ball reaction is that Bush would make an excellent Steeler.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bengals should take a run at him too. Almost any carbon based life form is an upgrade over Benson.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow.

So because Tolbert has more yards per CATCH as a RB, that means he's better? Hilarious.Their ypc career career numbers are similar, yet they have faced COMPLETELY different teams and run defenses in their career, so that's a terrible way to compare the two players as well.

There is much more context that goes into comparing two players, but I will save that for the people that will actually understand it. Just know that your opinion of Bush is amazingly off. Bush did a fantastic job once McFadden went down last season in week 7. From week 7 on, Bush's per game averages were 21 carries for 83 yds per game, with .4 td per game. That's being a productive bell cow. In fact, in reality, I would probably take Bush over McFadden in real life. Less injury concern, more reliable churning out yards and gaining positive yardage on a per play basis, cheaper...McFadden is the sexy pick to people that only know fantasy football like you (I know this is a fantasy football site), but sometimes there is more to grading a player than "how many yards did he put up in that game"

Michael Bush would be an animal in many NFL offenses if given the chance.

No I've never owned Michael Bush and don't have any bias towards him. I just laugh at the way some people have opinions. At least inform yourself first.

I've informed myself plenty. I already stated I think he's a fine running back and an excellent backup. Just about every team in the NFL could use a guy like that. But I think he's a mediocre starter at best. His ability to stay healthy and take a big load is something every team needs to have in case their guy goes down.

Apparently I can't compare him to other players on other teams. Or even other players in the same division. Can we at least compare him to his own teammate? I'm happy to ignore the fantasy production and actually list their real life stats. Or is there some ridiculous excuse I'm unaware of that prevents that as well?

Do you suggest we never compare two players ever? Because they've played different teams? Really, two players in the same division have played vastly different opponents? For the most part, teams in the same division play the same teams. There are a few differences but it's quite comparable. Less than 4 yards per carry is "fantastic"? From where I sit that's decidedely mediocre. And you'd take that over DMC? And Bush is a free agent who is going to command starter's money but he's ALSO a guy that's going to be cheaper than DMC?

Honestly, disagreements are fine if you've got a bit of reasoning behind it. But honestly, go screw yourself if you're going to dismiss an opinion and the facts that go with it with a "omg ur so uninformed" mantra. That is childish bull****.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I could see him working great for the Steelers but they already have Redman and they're way over the cap as it is. Bengals could work with the Hue connection but I'm skeptical they won't bring in a rookie. If it's not the Bengals I can't see him starting anywhere (again, barring injury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure anyone was suggesting Bush is an elite talent. We are talking fantasy football and has been pretty close to elite when it comes to putting up fantasy points. Some teams have real bad starting rbs and Bush would be an upgrade for many teams. He seems to be durable and can do a little bit of everything. I think he is starting somewhere next year and since he can be an every down RB....yeah, I like his potential a lot

Excellent point. My point is if a guy isn't elite in real life, the opportunities will not last. If Bush starts somewhere he'll be welcome on my team. He's definitely going to be a guy worth drafting. But his real life production has not been elite. And here lies the disconnect. He hasn't been very good in real life (nor has he been bad - he's just sort of been...there). He got off to a quick start when DMC went down but really started to fizzle as the season went on (hence ending with a 3.8 ypc). Lots of guys have come in fresh against tired teams only to wear down. Maybe Bush got tired as well. He had the 11th most carries in the NFL despite not really carrying the load until week 7. And with that massive load he had (once he took over he was right with MJD/Foster for the league lead) he really slowed down. Might he have some value if the Bengals sign him and give him 300 touches? Sure. That's what they did with Benson last year. And Benson finished outside the top 20 in most scoring systems.

Can you envision any team other than the Bengals signing him AND giving him a heavy workload? The Steelers have no money and may lose Wallace. The Browns? They're talking about bringing Hillis back or drafting Richardson but they're a possibility. What other team? The Vikings if they decided they didn't want Gerhart? The Jets? Those are the only teams I can even somewhat imagine him getting a heavy load with. And most of those scenarios are a big stretch. It seems like the Bengals are his best bet and he can do what Benson did last year. That's if the Bengals don't sign someone else, draft a rookie, or start throwing the ball more with Dalton/Green.

One team. That's his realistic chance to have fantasy value (and even if he hits that we're looking at a lower end #2). And if everything doesn't break just right? He's stuck in a rbbc and/or waiting for the starter to get injured. Which is exactly what I said to start the thread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent point. My point is if a guy isn't elite in real life, the opportunities will not last. If Bush starts somewhere he'll be welcome on my team. He's definitely going to be a guy worth drafting. But his real life production has not been elite. And here lies the disconnect. He hasn't been very good in real life (nor has he been bad - he's just sort of been...there). He got off to a quick start when DMC went down but really started to fizzle as the season went on (hence ending with a 3.8 ypc). Lots of guys have come in fresh against tired teams only to wear down. Maybe Bush got tired as well. He had the 11th most carries in the NFL despite not really carrying the load until week 7. And with that massive load he had (once he took over he was right with MJD/Foster for the league lead) he really slowed down. Might he have some value if the Bengals sign him and give him 300 touches? Sure. That's what they did with Benson last year. And Benson finished outside the top 20 in most scoring systems.

Can you envision any team other than the Bengals signing him AND giving him a heavy workload? The Steelers have no money and may lose Wallace. The Browns? They're talking about bringing Hillis back or drafting Richardson but they're a possibility. What other team? The Vikings if they decided they didn't want Gerhart? The Jets? Those are the only teams I can even somewhat imagine him getting a heavy load with. And most of those scenarios are a big stretch. It seems like the Bengals are his best bet and he can do what Benson did last year. That's if the Bengals don't sign someone else, draft a rookie, or start throwing the ball more with Dalton/Green.

One team. That's his realistic chance to have fantasy value (and even if he hits that we're looking at a lower end #2). And if everything doesn't break just right? He's stuck in a rbbc and/or waiting for the starter to get injured. Which is exactly what I said to start the thread.

I could see him working great for the Steelers but they already have Redman and they're way over the cap as it is. Bengals could work with the Hue connection but I'm skeptical they won't bring in a rookie. If it's not the Bengals I can't see him starting anywhere (again, barring injury.

I've informed myself plenty. I already stated I think he's a fine running back and an excellent backup. Just about every team in the NFL could use a guy like that. But I think he's a mediocre starter at best. His ability to stay healthy and take a big load is something every team needs to have in case their guy goes down.

Apparently I can't compare him to other players on other teams. Or even other players in the same division. Can we at least compare him to his own teammate? I'm happy to ignore the fantasy production and actually list their real life stats. Or is there some ridiculous excuse I'm unaware of that prevents that as well?

Do you suggest we never compare two players ever? Because they've played different teams? Really, two players in the same division have played vastly different opponents? For the most part, teams in the same division play the same teams. There are a few differences but it's quite comparable. Less than 4 yards per carry is "fantastic"? From where I sit that's decidedely mediocre. And you'd take that over DMC? And Bush is a free agent who is going to command starter's money but he's ALSO a guy that's going to be cheaper than DMC?

Honestly, disagreements are fine if you've got a bit of reasoning behind it. But honestly, go screw yourself if you're going to dismiss an opinion and the facts that go with it with a "omg ur so uninformed" mantra. That is childish bull****.

You know that there's an edit button and they made it much easier to quote multiple posts at once, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing players on different teams isn't as black and white as mr Rob tries to make it. There are many factors in play. How is the oline on the team he's on compared to the other player you're comparing him to? Schedule? Situation? Who's team has the better QB?Does one face stacked boxes on every play? There's a lot of factors in play when rating a RB in real life rather than "well player a ran for 87 yards on 22 carries in week 8, and player b only ran for 75 on 22 carries in week 8.

Not that simple to accurately evaluate a player's talent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Comparing players on different teams isn't as black and white as mr Rob tries to make it. There are many factors in play. How is the oline on the team he's on compared to the other player you're comparing him to? Schedule? Situation? Who's team has the better QB?Does one face stacked boxes on every play? There's a lot of factors in play when rating a RB in real life rather than "well player a ran for 87 yards on 22 carries in week 8, and player b only ran for 75 on 22 carries in week 8.

Not that simple to accurately evaluate a player's talent.

Only I didn't compare a single game. I compared their entire career. A career in which they have both played in the same division and mostly faced the same opponents. I've also compared Michael Bush to his own teammate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not making any predictions here...just want to suggest there are more then just the Bengals that could possibly make a run at him. His average but all around game could make him enticing to a few teams. The Bucaneers, Lions, Vikings, Jets, Colts, Patriots if the lose Law Firm, Giants if they lose RBs, Atlanta after they release Turner, Browns if they don't draft one, Seattle if they don't resign Lynch..Not saying any of these will happen but there are more then one possibility. Bottom line is this, Michael Bush is a goal line RB who can catch passes and is a slightly above average RB. In the fantasy world and especially PPR leagues, if he is getting catches and goal line touches, even in a committee, he can still be a very productive RB. If he lands a job all by himself, I think he has major potential.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.