Sony Michel to Rams

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,957
Fwiw, Belichick made it a point at the beginning of camp to say that this was the first offseason where Harris was being given a legitimate shot at the starting running back job. What I took from that statement is that Harris didn't really win the job last season, so much as he ended up with the job by default because Sony couldn't stay healthy. Make of that what you will, but thought it was worth noting.

Maybe the change just happened recently, but it certainly would seem to me that the team values Harris more highly than Michel. Probably for a variety of reasons. He's a bit more violent of a runner and finishes through contact better than Sony, imo.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
31,970
Melrose, MA
Sony's career was up and down, but he did some work in the 2018 playoffs. In the 3 games, 71 carries, 336 years, 6 TDs.\

Thank you, Sony.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
13,382
Mansfield MA
I mean both were available for what 2 games and split carries 27/17? What Bill values in a RB room is also not the same as what others do, he likes reliable non-pass catchers more than maybe anyone else in the league. I think Bill probably (correctly) sees them as interchangeable parts. The start of this whole digression was my wondering if they shopped both and Sony was the guy LA wanted (and I think that's likely the case).
Three games. They split carries 14/0 vs AZ (Sony only played 1 snap), 16/10 vs LAC, and 11/7 vs LAR. But even those undersell it. Sony only got 2 first-half carries vs the Chargers (Harris had 12); he got 6 carries (and a catch) in the 4th quarter when the Pats were already up 30+. Again, he only got 2 carries in the first half vs the Rams (to Harris' 9); Harris got hurt in the first drive of the second half and almost all Michel's work was after that. So it's pretty clear he was the #2 guy for those three games.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,246
Dallas
I agree that a quality, reliable starter is probably the median outcome for the ass end of the first round. And, if I had time, I probably should have expanded my range to cover picks 30-32 or something similar. Michel was below that, mainly due to his knee, IMO; I realize others may disagree with that assessment, but in that playoff run he showed real production running against good defenses. And the knee was a pre-existing condition, so it's not like it just happened after he arrived here.

I wouldn't call it a good pick, but it wasn't a Ken Sims disaster either. It was a better pick in retrospect than Dominique Easley, and maybe equivalent to Malcolm Brown (again, debatable). But Bill will get some future draft capital out of it, which is not the worst outcome either.
That’s a good discussion. Brown got between 40-60% snaps during his time here and was an average to above average player. He never developed much as a pass rusher so his upside was limited. Sony had one good year, an injury riddled unproductive year, another year of being a backup/shared carries guy while also battling injuries and then was looking good this preseason. Brown was more consistent but Sony had the best individual year.

That's exactly my point, though, teams are interested in Sony for this year because he could be very good, his injury is progressive, but in some ways that is better on one year than one which doesn't allow explosiveness. I think you are missing my point. I think Sony has mediocre value, a 4th was a good get for him. I just think Harris has little value, if we're using NBA terms he's Cory Joseph. There's a reason even with his knees Kemba had more value when he became a FA than Joseph did. Short term gambles on players with higher ceilings make more sense to teams than longer term lower risk deals on guys with low ceilings and emminently replaceable skillsets.
Sony is more of a guy you need to get out in the open for him to work his magic whereas Harris is better with his vision behind the LOS, working cutbacks, and then as a slasher-bruiser. Personally I think Harris is the better back and has more value. I think Harris is a more consistent runner. PFF loved Harris last year. He was a top 3 back for them. Other services loved Sony’s limited reps many of which came against Abrams and the Raiders. Abram took comically bad angles and couldn’t readjust on the fly. If I had to pick which back is better right now though I’d give Harris the edge. I’m not sure what his trade value would be but if I am the Patriots I’d rather have the guy with 2 years on his contract (which is what happened).
 

radsoxfan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 9, 2009
10,893
Sony is more of a guy you need to get out in the open for him to work his magic whereas Harris is better with his vision behind the LOS, working cutbacks, and then as a slasher-bruiser. Personally I think Harris is the better back and has more value. I think Harris is a more consistent runner. PFF loved Harris last year. He was a top 3 back for them. Other services loved Sony’s limited reps many of which came against Abrams and the Raiders. Abram took comically bad angles and couldn’t readjust on the fly. If I had to pick which back is better right now though I’d give Harris the edge. I’m not sure what his trade value would be but if I am the Patriots I’d rather have the guy with 2 years on his contract (which is what happened).
Agreed.

All available info and logic points to Harris being the starter here, preferred by BB, and more valuable around the league.

Doesn’t seem particularly close to me when you include contracts and injury issues.

Even if Harris doesn’t have huge value around the league, I would be floored if the Rams (or anyone) valued Michel over Harris at this moment.
 

Ale Xander

Lacks black ink
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
40,897
I’m happy for Sony. The Rams are one of a handful of teams with a chance to win a ring if several things break right, and they wouldn’t have done this trade if they didn’t have a role for him.

For the Pats, it’s addition by subtraction imo. Not because Sony can’t add value in the right situation, but because it seemed like McD narrowed the playbook when Sony was on the field. We’re better off with a less talented but more versatile back. (And I don’t think it’s a given that the alternatives are less talented than Sony.)
I agree with most of this of this but not the playbook part. Harris is a weaker receiver out of the backfield than Michel.
 
Apr 24, 2019
815
Interesting. This is arguably better b/c a conditional 4th is a bit more like a 5th than a 4th since it comes after all 32 picks have come in the round. Here's hoping the Rams suck in 2022.
 

Zedia

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 17, 2005
4,975
Pasadena, CA

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,246
Dallas
Lombardi weighing in. Said the team loves Harris and he thinks he’s going to have a huge year. That he does not give out fantasy advice but he believes a lot in Harris and their OL and how they will run the ball a lot. Stevenson’s emergence helped them feel comfortable (more or less) trading him and that they have an all around good RB room. A lot of guys that can do a lot of things.

Seems pretty simple. Makes sense.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,503
Berkeley, CA
Lombardi weighing in. Said the team loves Harris and he thinks he’s going to have a huge year. That he does not give out fantasy advice but he believes a lot in Harris and their OL and how they will run the ball a lot. Stevenson’s emergence helped them feel comfortable (more or less) trading him and that they have an all around good RB room. A lot of guys that can do a lot of things.

Seems pretty simple. Makes sense.
That seems to back up the move made here. Good trade and good timing by BB. I wonder if the Travis Etienne injury pushed the Rams forward for fear of losing out on a good fit for them. BB doesn't risk Sony getting injured and losing value and he sheds some salary while handing the keys to the RB with a couple more years of control. If he and Mac pan out, that's a lot of money to throw at other positions for a couple of years. It's potentially THE sweetest spot to be in within the NFL.
 

mauf

Anderson Cooper × Mr. Rogers
Staff member
Dope
That seems to back up the move made here. Good trade and good timing by BB. I wonder if the Travis Etienne injury pushed the Rams forward for fear of losing out on a good fit for them. BB doesn't risk Sony getting injured and losing value and he sheds some salary while handing the keys to the RB with a couple more years of control. If he and Mac pan out, that's a lot of money to throw at other positions for a couple of years. It's potentially THE sweetest spot to be in within the NFL.
Good post. Though I doubt the Jags will trade for a RB. James Robinson had 1400 all-purpose yards last year; the Etienne pick was driven by desire for the particular player rather than positional need, so I’d expect them to roll with Robinson this year and see how Etienne looks in 2022.
 

DourDoerr

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Oct 15, 2004
2,503
Berkeley, CA
Good post. Though I doubt the Jags will trade for a RB. James Robinson had 1400 all-purpose yards last year; the Etienne pick was driven by desire for the particular player rather than positional need, so I’d expect them to roll with Robinson this year and see how Etienne looks in 2022.
Thanks, I didn't know the particulars about the Jag's RB situation beyond headlines about Etienne's injury, so figured there may be a need.
 

Eddie Jurak

Go Leafs Go
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2002
31,970
Melrose, MA
Lombardi weighing in. Said the team loves Harris and he thinks he’s going to have a huge year. That he does not give out fantasy advice but he believes a lot in Harris and their OL and how they will run the ball a lot. Stevenson’s emergence helped them feel comfortable (more or less) trading him and that they have an all around good RB room. A lot of guys that can do a lot of things.

Seems pretty simple. Makes sense.
I agree. I think they would have been very hesitant to do this before Stevenson's emergence, but he has showed them enough now.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,012
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
I'm more with the former than the latter. Flags fly forever, and they don't win the Super Bowl that season without Sony Michel. He was borderline unstoppable in the first half of that Chargers playoff game.

He'll always be judged vis-a-vis Lamar Jackson and Nick Chubb, and the pick certainly looks bad when framed that way. But the Pats definitely don't win the Super Bowl that season if they take Lamar Jackson, and one can't simply assume they do with Chubb either. We know they did with Michel. Doesn't make it a great pick by any stretch, but I have difficulty drumming up any animosity towards it. Hoped he would have been better/healthier, but he played a major role for a championship team.

I end up landing on the pick being fine. Not perfect, could have been worse. Just fine.
This is repeated ad nauseum and I just don't think it's true. I think there are about 20 guys you could have plugged on that team at RB that would have given you a similar end result.

Sony played well in the playoffs, but they had a great OL and built the lead against the Chargers by throwing the ball, scored 3 consecutive TDs against the Chiefs when it was do or die by throwing the ball and had their best drives against the Rams by throwing the ball. Not to mention the fact that in crucial spots in the AFCCG and the Super Bowl Rex Burkhead was on the field because Sony gave you nothing in the passing game. I think he did very well but his overall contributions to that title run are vastly overstated by the fan base
 

Old Fart Tree

the maven of meat
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 10, 2001
10,305
The Yay Area
This is repeated ad nauseum and I just don't think it's true. I think there are about 20 guys you could have plugged on that team at RB that would have given you a similar end result.

Sony played well in the playoffs, but they had a great OL and built the lead against the Chargers by throwing the ball, scored 3 consecutive TDs against the Chiefs when it was do or die by throwing the ball and had their best drives against the Rams by throwing the ball. Not to mention the fact that in crucial spots in the AFCCG and the Super Bowl Rex Burkhead was on the field because Sony gave you nothing in the passing game. I think he did very well but his overall contributions to that title run are vastly overstated by the fan base
Small quibble - didn’t he score the tying TD on fourth and inches against the chiefs?
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,012
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Small quibble - didn’t he score the tying TD on fourth and inches against the chiefs?
Oh, he scored plenty and that was a good play, the argument wasn't that they threw TD passes, but that the drives were mostly comprised of passes. I'm not saying he did nothing, it's just that I disagree with the "they don't win without him" premise because I think it doesn't take into account the fact that had they not drafted Sony Michel the Patriots would have found a starting RB elsewhere and I believe that guy very likely ends contributing to a title in a similar manner. Especially considering the following season with a bad run blocking OL Sony had terrible production.
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,957
This is repeated ad nauseum and I just don't think it's true. I think there are about 20 guys you could have plugged on that team at RB that would have given you a similar end result.

Sony played well in the playoffs, but they had a great OL and built the lead against the Chargers by throwing the ball, scored 3 consecutive TDs against the Chiefs when it was do or die by throwing the ball and had their best drives against the Rams by throwing the ball. Not to mention the fact that in crucial spots in the AFCCG and the Super Bowl Rex Burkhead was on the field because Sony gave you nothing in the passing game. I think he did very well but his overall contributions to that title run are vastly overstated by the fan base
Sony Michel averaged 24 carries, 112 rushing yards, and 2 TDs per game in the 2018 playoffs. How many RBs in NFL history do you think have done that throughout the playoffs on their way to a Super Bowl victory? You may choose to live in some fantasy land where Johnny Foxboro could have done the same thing, but here on Planet Earth, Sony Michel actually did those things. I tend to value those things when they are done for the football team that I root for. Call me crazy.

If what Sony Michel did was so easy, how is it that no other Patriots running back has come close to doing it? Not Corey Dillon. Not Antowain Smith. Not LeGarrette Blount. The closest, believe it or not, is probably Laurence Maroney, who was dynamite in the 2007 playoffs until the Scottish Game.

There are Pats fans that still gush about the contributions of J.R. Redmond because he caught a few passes in a couple games. Myself included! But he didn't contribute anywhere near to what Sony Michel did. I think it's completely absurd that anyone would try to minimize those accomplishments instead of celebrating them. If you choose to be miserable, that's on you buddy.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,012
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Sony Michel averaged 24 carries, 112 rushing yards, and 2 TDs per game in the 2018 playoffs. How many RBs in NFL history do you think have done that throughout the playoffs on their way to a Super Bowl victory? You may choose to live in some fantasy land where Johnny Foxboro could have done the same thing, but here on Planet Earth, Sony Michel actually did those things. I tend to value those things when they are done for the football team that I root for. Call me crazy.

If what Sony Michel did was so easy, how is it that no other Patriots running back has come close to doing it? Not Corey Dillon. Not Antowain Smith. Not LeGarrette Blount. The closest, believe it or not, is probably Laurence Maroney, who was dynamite in the 2007 playoffs until the Scottish Game.

There are Pats fans that still gush about the contributions of J.R. Redmond because he caught a few passes in a couple games. Myself included! But he didn't contribute anywhere near to what Sony Michel did. I think it's completely absurd that anyone would try to minimize those accomplishments instead of celebrating them. If you choose to be miserable, that's on you buddy.
Boy, we sure got fleeced if all we got for this generational running back who's probably better than peak Corey Dillon was a conditional 4th rounder, then.

And I like Sony and think he would've helped the 2021 team especially since he seems to have improved a whole lot as a pass catcher. I just think he's the kind of running back who will more likely than not get the yards the OL provides him and there's no shortage of those guys in the league.
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,957
Boy, we sure got fleeced if all we got for this generational running back who's probably better than peak Corey Dillon was a conditional 4th rounder, then.
That's more than they got for Dillon at the end, which was nothing because they cut him.
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,957
That's why the word "peak" is in there, bud.
Did peak Corey Dillon ever do what Sony Michel did in the 2018 playoffs? I must have missed that playoff run. Doesn't mean Sony was a better RB, but credit where it's due.

Well, Dillon played his 10th and final season when he was released. He then promptly retired from the NFL.
And that has about as much to do with this debate as Sony's trade compensation. Which is to say, nothing.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
8,012
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
Did peak Corey Dillon ever do what Sony Michel did in the 2018 playoffs? I must have missed that playoff run. Doesn't mean Sony was a better RB, but credit where it's due.


And that has about as much to do with this debate as Sony's trade compensation. Which is to say, nothing.
No, peak Corey Dillon didn't do that, which has no bearing in my argument, really. I just think RBs are fungible for the most part unless they're really really good and Sony isn't in that class of player, so I disagree that they wouldn't have won that title without him. RBs are especially fungible when you have an all time QB and a terrific run blocking OL, which the 2018 Pats had, even if they were struggling a bit throwing the ball to end the season (which wasn't the case in the playoffs until the Super Bowl). Now, for the 2021 team I think that equation could be slightly different because their passing game is a question mark.

Of course, one thing actually happened (Sony played well and they won) and I'm merely speculating, so it's probably a dumb discussion to begin with. Didn't mean for it to become heated or anything.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,890
Hingham, MA
Yeah I mean you guys are both right.

It is an interesting philosophical question though. If you could go back in time and draft Chubb instead, would you? I probably wouldn't, given that they now have Harris and Stevenson on the roster. But my answer might have been different a year ago, before Harris broke out and they drafted Stevenson. They got 3 decent years from Sony, a ring, and some compensation on the way out.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
7,319
Needham, MA
Yeah I mean you guys are both right.

It is an interesting philosophical question though. If you could go back in time and draft Chubb instead, would you? I probably wouldn't, given that they now have Harris and Stevenson on the roster. But my answer might have been different a year ago, before Harris broke out and they drafted Stevenson. They got 3 decent years from Sony, a ring, and some compensation on the way out.
Was just going to post something like this. It can be simultaneously true that Sony was great in the playoffs and that other RBs could have done the same. Sony's performance in the playoffs that year is a combination of game plan, circumstance and great play from him.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,246
Dallas
I think it's a great topic! I'd like to weigh in on this one. Running backs both matter and don't matter. PFF, FO, and other analysts have all looked into this topic. Running backs typically are a product of their line. So if you have a good line you will get good RB production. Now sometimes that doesn't happen. Take Darrell Henderson's first year for the Rams or Antonio Gibson's first handful of games for the WFT. Both those guys had technical issues not knowing how and when to cut, hit the hole, press the line, etc. Their OLs were opening up holes but both those guys had issues executing. Both got better. Gibson by the end of last year had cleaned up his footwork and timing, same with Henderson in year 2.

To get into this in terms of the Patriots let's look at some stats:

Here is Sony's career grades via PFF:
43762

Here are the Patriots line stats:
2018:
43763

2019:
43764
2020:
43765

Let's look at those from football outsiders too:
2018:
43766
2019:
43767
2020:
43768


What doe this tell us? It tells us that the Patriots have been one of the better run blocking teams the past 3 years. Whether it is PFF or FO or listening to guys like Brandon Thorn and Duke Manyweather the consensus has been clear that their run-blocking and overall OL play has been exceptional. They did have a dip in quality in 2019. It also tells us that Sony's production dipped when line play declined. That's normal. But we also see that Sony in 2018 and 2019 ranked in the mid to high 20's for open field rank. Open field rank is football outsiders way of showing how effective a RB is in space. We also see that with Sony at the helm the line was more helpful in creating yards than Sony. That Adj. line yards - rb yards tightened up with Harris leading the attack. So to me that indicates that Sony was more a product of the line (an exceptional line). Sony is a competent back. He took what was given to him but was not as successful breaking off long runs or creating opportunities himself. I think that supports the theory that if they had another competent back he would have produced similarly to Sony. That isn't a given. Rashaad Penny might not have worked out but Chubb probably would have! So arguing if they had just drafted any other back there is a dubious proposition. If they had signed a guy to be a starting back like say a Blount type he also probably would have worked out too given their OL. So while I believe @rodderick is right that Sony's production probably could have been replaced with someone else it is not a given and to @Soxy 's point Sony actually produced those yards in a competent manner which has to count for something.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
Gold Supporter
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
50,154
New York City
Sony Michel averaged 24 carries, 112 rushing yards, and 2 TDs per game in the 2018 playoffs. How many RBs in NFL history do you think have done that throughout the playoffs on their way to a Super Bowl victory? You may choose to live in some fantasy land where Johnny Foxboro could have done the same thing, but here on Planet Earth, Sony Michel actually did those things. I tend to value those things when they are done for the football team that I root for. Call me crazy.

If what Sony Michel did was so easy, how is it that no other Patriots running back has come close to doing it? Not Corey Dillon. Not Antowain Smith. Not LeGarrette Blount. The closest, believe it or not, is probably Laurence Maroney, who was dynamite in the 2007 playoffs until the Scottish Game.

There are Pats fans that still gush about the contributions of J.R. Redmond because he caught a few passes in a couple games. Myself included! But he didn't contribute anywhere near to what Sony Michel did. I think it's completely absurd that anyone would try to minimize those accomplishments instead of celebrating them. If you choose to be miserable, that's on you buddy.
This is one of the stupidest posts in SoSH history.

Are you suggesting that three games is a huge sample size? Rex Burkhead scored 2 TDs against the Chiefs. Needless to say, I guess we can assume he'll average 2 TDs a game for the rest of his life.

edit - taking this further, Rex averaged over 6 yards a carry against the Rams in the SB. Sony averaged 5.2. Needless to say, Rex is obviously 20% better than Sony because, hey, those were the results on the field.
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,957
No, peak Corey Dillon didn't do that, which has no bearing in my argument, really. I just think RBs are fungible for the most part unless they're really really good and Sony isn't in that class of player, so I disagree that they wouldn't have won that title without him. RBs are especially fungible when you have an all time QB and a terrific run blocking OL, which the 2018 Pats had, even if they were struggling a bit throwing the ball to end the season (which wasn't the case in the playoffs until the Super Bowl). Now, for the 2021 team I think that equation could be slightly different because their passing game is a question mark.

Of course, one thing actually happened (Sony played well and they won) and I'm merely speculating, so it's probably a dumb discussion to begin with. Didn't mean for it to become heated or anything.
Sure, but you're talking about a broader, more philosophical position (RBs are fungible). I'm not sure it's fair to punish Sony Michel for that. Whether or not they should be taking a RB at all in the first round is a broader discussion. I tend to agree more with tims4wins, in that it ended up working out, at least in 2018, and Sony played great when it mattered most, so I'm fine letting sleeping dogs lie. Was it optimal? Well, no, Lamar Jackson probably would have been, but then you're reshaping history and it becomes an entirely different discussion.

Your last paragraph is basically what I was getting at. Hence my comment about you seeming miserable, as it's the only reason I can come up with why someone would dismiss what Sony actually did and choose to be like "no, that's not very impressive, anyone could have done that, actually." I mean, maybe? I don't know, man. If it were that easy, I think more guys probably would have done it. They've played in a lot of Super Bowls over the past 20 years and nobody has touched the production running the ball that Sony put up in those three games. He was the 1A to James White's 1B, with Rex Burkhead clearly being the third banana. Sure, Rex put up production too, maybe he could have done what Sony did if he were given the opportunity. All I know is they actually did give those carries to Michel, and he produced.
 

Jungleland

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 2, 2009
1,304
No one should quibble with Sony being a disappointment as a player to this point in his career - middling is indeed a perfect word and SMU’s fantastic post above is a better look at why than I could ever provide. In a vacuum I think it’s fine to call it a bust of a pick for that reason, and the caliber of running back that Nick Chubb is will for the rest of their careers be as simple of an on-field illustration of that as can be.

When I inadvertently kicked off this argument a day ago, my point was simply that showing up on the biggest stage in a year the team won it all, and then getting shipped away for what should be a pick that’s a legitimate bite at the apple before the rookie contract is out is an outcome I can’t find even an ounce of angst about at this point. I’m not willing to go as far as saying they wouldn’t have won the Super Bowl without him, but a first round rb is as close to a luxury go for it now pick as it gets in the modern NFL and they succeeded. I’ll take it alongside what look to be two draft hits in Harris and Stevenson and look forward to seeing what the new pick(s) become.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,246
Dallas
Yeah I mean you guys are both right.

It is an interesting philosophical question though. If you could go back in time and draft Chubb instead, would you? I probably wouldn't, given that they now have Harris and Stevenson on the roster. But my answer might have been different a year ago, before Harris broke out and they drafted Stevenson. They got 3 decent years from Sony, a ring, and some compensation on the way out.
I didn't do rankings back then but Chubb was my guy that year aside from Saquon. The only knock I had on him aside from his injury history was I didn't know if he would ever be a good receiver. In terms of pass pro and running though I loved Chubb. I would have taken him over Michel. I think at 31 I would have gone Goedert personally.

Edit: OMG how did I not say Lamar Jackson here... yeah I would have gone Lamar.
 
Last edited:

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,957
Hey now, let's chill a bit, shall we?
Maybe I would have been better off using "miserly" instead? Almost did, figured it's basically the same thing either way.

Anyways, apologies if I was being overly harsh. Didn't mean it as a personal insult towards rodderick or anything like that. More of a comment on the tone of his posts, that's all.

All the negativity in this town sucks! [/Pitino]
 

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
114
Sony Michel averaged 24 carries, 112 rushing yards, and 2 TDs per game in the 2018 playoffs. How many RBs in NFL history do you think have done that throughout the playoffs on their way to a Super Bowl victory?
Quite literally hundreds could have done that in the same situation as he was in. I don't think it'd be difficult to identify over a dozen RBs from 2018 alone who would've matched or outdone that level of production in those circumstances. Running over the Chargers in the divisional round was not a difficult task.

If you could go back in time and draft Chubb instead, would you?
If it's a choice between using a time machine to get Chubb, then it's Chubb without hesitation. If it's a choice between drafting a Chubb, Michel, or anyone else, then I'm slamming that "literally anyone else" button so hard it's probably going to break. Does it really need to be pointed out that the very next pick was MVP quarterback Lamar Jackson, and that Darius Leonard and Courtland Sutton were also right there taken a few picks later? I mean, I generally hate to not be player-agnostic when evaluating these sorts of decisions because I don't think that's a fair use of hindsight, but it is exceedingly difficult to look at what's happened since this albatross of a first round selection and not be incredibly annoyed that this fairly important asset was spent on a position for which there is practically zero premium to picking early in the draft, and rhetorically it's worth noting that the very next pick was an MVP-winning quarterback. draft_success_rb_rushing-1024x717.png
The bewildering thing is that the Patriots have otherwise been an absolute stalwart of roster strategy when it comes to running backs; they've always maintained a full backfield of capable running backs acquired for cheap, either as UFAs or as second or third day rookies, getting very solid production out of the position without ever investing extensive resources into it. The RBBC carousel had been a resounding success. I don't know how they went from that approach to drafting a running back in the first round. How were Belichick and Caserio under the impression that they needed to move away from that model?
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,957
Quite literally hundreds could have done that in the same situation as he was in. I don't think it'd be difficult to identify over a dozen RBs from 2018 alone who would've matched or outdone that level of production in those circumstances. Running over the Chargers in the divisional round was not a difficult task.
You're answering a different question than the one that I asked.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,246
Dallas
Do they win more or less super bowls drafting someone else. No one can answer that. I'll take the banner everyday of the week.
If they drafted Chubb? I think he's the clear stud back they could have taken in hindsight. Aside from Saquon no RB was taken until 27th. So let's look at the other backs taken from 27 through 64:

27) Rashaad Penny - lol no. He's been hurt and/or ineffective. There is some buzz he could be a fantasy sleeper this year so, uh, I guess he has that going for him.
35) Nick Chubb - I saw Chubb twice in live action down in Georgia visiting my partner's family. That's all I have to add because it should be obvious that Chubb = stud.
38) Ronald Jones - he hasn't worked out either
43) Kerryon Johnson - nope
59) Derrius Guice - absolutely not.

Sony has had a better career than all but one of these guys, Chubb. That RB class was also weak - hardly any RB drafted has made a big impact. Nyheim Hines in the 4th was a nice pick but he's more of a James White type and not a lead back.
 

tims4wins

PN23's replacement
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
27,890
Hingham, MA
FWIW, Sony's 336 yards in 2018 were #14 all time for a single season playoffs, and his 6 rushing TDs were T-2 all time (along with 7 other guys).

It's a pretty fucking good list though:

[TH]Rank[/TH] [TH]Player[/TH] [TH]TD[/TH] [TH]Year[/TH] [TH]Tm[/TH] [TH]1[/TH] [TH]2[/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH] [TH][/TH]
Terrell Davis+ (24) 8 1997 DEN
Larry Csonka+ (26) 6 1973 MIA
Franco Harris+ (24) 6 1974 PIT
Sony Michel (23) 6 2018 NWE
Gerald Riggs (30) 6 1991 WAS
John Riggins+ (34) 6 1983 WAS
Emmitt Smith+ (26) 6 1995 DAL
Ricky Watters (24) 6 1993 SFO
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
22,333
If they drafted Chubb? I think he's the clear stud back they could have taken in hindsight. Aside from Saquon no RB was taken until 27th. So let's look at the other backs taken from 27 through 64:

27) Rashaad Penny - lol no. He's been hurt and/or ineffective. There is some buzz he could be a fantasy sleeper this year so, uh, I guess he has that going for him.
35) Nick Chubb - I saw Chubb twice in live action down in Georgia visiting my partner's family. That's all I have to add because it should be obvious that Chubb = stud.
38) Ronald Jones - he hasn't worked out either
43) Kerryon Johnson - nope
59) Derrius Guice - absolutely not.

Sony has had a better career than all but one of these guys, Chubb. That RB class was also weak - hardly any RB drafted has made a big impact. Nyheim Hines in the 4th was a nice pick but he's more of a James White type and not a lead back.
What if they drafted Lamar and picked up a scrapheap RB?
 

Big McCorkle

Member
SoSH Member
May 9, 2021
114
You're answering a different question than the one that I asked.
Because the question you asked is a silly question. And, because what you then said doesn't logically follow from the question. I'm too time crunched to go in depth now, might be able to come back to this later, but, in short: that Sony Michel had X amount of production in Y situation does not in any way indicate that other running backs could not or would not have done the same or better in that same situation. You're absolutely allowed to have good memories of the 2018 championship run, but that doesn't actually mean that drafting Michel was the right decision. Also, you bring up LeGarrette Blount, which is curious, because I vividly remember him having multiple 150 yard playoff games with a fuckton of touchdowns in no small part as a result of running behind an offensive line that was just physically bullying and emotionally abusing an opposing defense.
 

SMU_Sox

queer eye for the next pats guy
SoSH Member
Jul 20, 2009
7,246
Dallas
What if they drafted Lamar and picked up a scrapheap RB?
I own one non-Patriots jersey. It's Lamar. I also think he could have been used as a runner too... special plays for him while Brady was at the helm. It would depend on who the guy was. As long as the guy could get what was blocked it is hard to imagine that he wouldn't have looked good behind that OL. We'd have to look at specific backs though to better speculate. Did you have anyone in mind? If Hill had stayed healthy he might have been able to pull it off though.
 

Cellar-Door

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 1, 2006
22,333
I own one non-Patriots jersey. It's Lamar. I also think he could have been used as a runner too... special plays for him while Brady was at the helm. It would depend on who the guy was. As long as the guy could get what was blocked it is hard to imagine that he wouldn't have looked good behind that OL. We'd have to look at specific backs though to better speculate. Did you have anyone in mind? If Hill had stayed healthy he might have been able to pull it off though.
Probably a rookie with the Etling pick: Josh Jackson, Gus Edwards, Phillip Lindsay were the names available
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
5,957
Because the question you asked is a silly question. And, because what you then said doesn't logically follow from the question. I'm too time crunched to go in depth now, might be able to come back to this later, but, in short: that Sony Michel had X amount of production in Y situation does not in any way indicate that other running backs could not or would not have done the same or better in that same situation. You're absolutely allowed to have good memories of the 2018 championship run, but that doesn't actually mean that drafting Michel was the right decision. Also, you bring up LeGarrette Blount, which is curious, because I vividly remember him having multiple 150 yard playoff games with a fuckton of touchdowns in no small part as a result of running behind an offensive line that was just physically bullying and emotionally abusing an opposing defense.
No, the difference is that I am trading in fact, whereas you (and others) want to tread in hypotheticals. I'm talking about what players actually did, what they actually accomplished, not what some hypothetical player may have been able to do if we were recreating history somehow in a make believe fantasy land.

I also find it curious that you want to dismiss what Sony did against the Chargers ("not a difficult task") but want to trumpet the accomplishments of LeGarrette Blount? The same LeGarrette Blount who didn't do anything in the playoffs against teams not named the Colts?