t.j 35 Posted March 13, 2007 Ok. Luckily, pro-football-reference.com has individual playoff statistics. So it was a bit tedious but not too difficult to add playoff carries into the equation. Career carries was also somewhat tedious, but not too difficult. In this post is the updated data based on your feedback. This is how it was determined: -I looked up all players with 300 or more carries in the regular season -I checked the number of playoff carries for each of these players -I listed all players with a combined (regular season + playoffs) 375 carries -I included regular season stats for the 1st season and the season after, as well as playoff and total carries for the 1st season, and also career carries through the end of the 1st season. -Note that while Larry Johnson ranks 1st in most carries ever in the regular season, he ranks 10th in most carries ever in a season including playoffs. -Again, Ricky Williams' 2003 season is not included among the calculated averages because he was suspended in '04. Larry Johnson's 2006 season is also obviously not included among the calculated averages. YEAR PLAYER RA RA RA RYD YPC RTD RFP AGE RA RS RA ALL All P RS CAREER CAREER ‘YR PLAYER RA RYD YPC RTD RFP RA RS RYD YPC TD FP RS Diff Diff Diff Diff Diff 1997 Terrell Davis, DEN 481 112 369 1750 4.7 15 265.0 25.8 951 1077 ‘98 Terrell Davis, DEN 392 2008 5.1 21 326.8 23 258 0.4 6 61.8 1998 Jamal Anderson, ATL 480 70 410 1846 4.5 14 268.6 26.9 973 1043 ‘99 Jamal Anderson, ATL 19 59 3.1 0 5.9 -391 -1787 -1.4 -14 -262.7 1998 Terrell Davis, DEN 470 78 392 2008 5.1 21 326.8 26.8 1343 1547 ‘99 Terrell Davis, DEN 67 211 3.1 2 33.1 -325 -1797 -2.0 -19 -293.7 1983 John Riggins, WAS 462 87 375 1347 3.6 24 278.7 35.1 2413 2643 ‘84 John Riggins, WAS 327 1239 3.8 14 207.9 -48 -108 0.2 -10 -70.8 1995 Emmitt Smith, DAL 451 74 377 1773 4.7 25 327.3 27.3 2007 2286 ‘96 Emmitt Smith, DAL 327 1204 3.7 12 192.4 -50 -569 -1.0 -13 -134.9 1992 Emmitt Smith, DAL 444 71 373 1713 4.6 18 279.3 24.3 979 1091 ‘93 Emmitt Smith, DAL 283 1486 5.3 9 202.6 -90 -227 0.7 -9 -76.7 1986 Eric Dickerson, LAM 430 26 404 1821 4.5 11 248.1 27.0 1465 1598 ‘87 E. Dickerson, LA/IND 283 1288 4.6 6 164.8 -121 -533 0.1 -5 -83.3 2000 Eddie George, TEN 430 27 403 1509 3.7 14 234.9 27.9 1763 1898 ‘01 Eddie George, TEN 315 939 3.0 5 123.9 -88 -570 -0.7 -9 -111 2005 Shaun Alexander, SEA 430 60 370 1880 5.1 27 350.0 29.0 1717 1812 ‘06 Shaun Alexander, SEA 252 896 3.6 7 131.6 -118 -984 -1.5 -20 -218.4 2006 Larry Johnson, KC 429 13 416 1789 4.3 17 280.9 27.8 892 905 ‘07 Larry Johnson, KC 1999 Eddie George, TEN 428 108 320 1304 4.1 9 184.4 26.9 1360 1468 ‘00 Eddie George, TEN 403 1509 3.7 14 234.9 83 205 -0.4 5 50.5 1984 Walter Payton, CHI 427 46 381 1684 4.4 11 234.4 31.1 3047 3128 ‘85 Walter Payton, CHI 324 1551 4.8 9 209.1 -57 -133 0.4 -2 -25.3 1983 Eric Dickerson, LAM 423 33 390 1808 4.6 18 288.8 24.0 390 423 ‘84 Eric Dickerson, LAM 379 2105 5.6 14 294.5 -11 297 1.0 -4 5.7 1997 Jerome Bettis, PIT 423 48 375 1665 4.4 7 208.5 26.5 1491 1577 ‘98 Jerome Bettis, PIT 316 1185 3.8 3 136.5 -59 -480 -0.6 -4 -72.0 1998 Curtis Martin, NYJ 418 49 369 1287 3.5 8 176.7 26.3 1327 1425 ‘99 Curtis Martin, NYJ 367 1464 4.0 5 176.4 -2 177 0.5 -3 -0.3 1993 Thurman Thomas, BUF 418 63 355 1315 3.7 6 167.5 28.3 1731 2006 ‘94 Thurman Thomas, BUF 287 1093 3.8 7 151.3 -68 -222 0.1 1 -16.2 1986 Joe Morris, NYG 414 73 341 1516 4.4 14 235.6 27.0 818 958 ‘87 Joe Morris, NYG 193 658 3.4 3 83.8 -148 -858 -1.0 -11 -151.8 2000 Jamal Lewis, BAL 412 103 309 1364 4.4 6 172.4 22.0 309 412 ‘01 Jamal Lewis 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 -309 -1364 -4.4 -6 -172.4 1992 Barry Foster, PIT 410 20 390 1690 4.3 11 235.0 24.7 522 542 ‘93 Barry Foster, PIT 177 711 4.0 8 119.1 -213 -979 -0.3 -3 -115.9 2004 Corey Dillon, NE 410 65 345 1635 4.7 12 235.5 30.9 2210 2275 ‘05 Corey Dillon, NE 209 733 3.5 12 145.3 -136 -902 -1.2 0 -90.2 2000 Edgerrin James, IND 408 21 387 1709 4.4 13 248.9 23.1 756 797 ‘01 Edgerrin James, IND 151 662 4.4 3 84.2 -236 -1047 0.0 -10 -164.7 TOP 20 AVG 434 62 372 1631 4.4 14 248.3 27.1 1380 1502 TOP 20 AVG 254 1050 4.1 8 151.2 -118 -581 -0.2 -7 -97.1 2004 Curtis Martin, NYJ 408 37 371 1697 4.6 12 241.7 32.3 3298 3480 ‘05 Curtis Martin, NYJ 220 735 3.3 5 103.5 -151 -962 -1.3 -7 -138.2 1984 James Wilder, TB 407 0 407 1544 3.8 13 232.4 27.3 758 776 ‘85 James Wilder, TB 365 1300 3.6 10 190.0 -42 -244 -0.2 -3 -42.4 1991 Emmitt Smith, DAL 406 41 365 1563 4.3 12 228.3 23.3 606 647 ‘92 Emmitt Smith, DAL 373 1713 4.6 18 279.3 8 150 0.3 6 51.0 2003 Ahman Green, GB 403 48 355 1883 5.3 15 278.3 27.5 1269 1365 ‘04 Ahman Green, GB 259 1163 4.5 7 158.3 -96 -720 -0.8 -8 -120.0 1985 Marcus Allen, LAI 402 22 380 1759 4.6 11 241.9 26.4 1081 1210 ‘86 Marcus Allen, LAI 208 759 3.6 5 105.9 -172 -1000 -1.0 -6 -136.0 1984 Eric Dickerson, LAM 402 23 379 2105 5.6 14 294.5 25.0 769 825 ‘85 Eric Dickerson, LAM 292 1234 4.2 12 195.4 -87 -871 -1.4 -2 -99.1 2003 Jamal Lewis, BAL 401 14 387 2066 5.3 14 290.6 25.0 1004 1121 ‘04 Jamal Lewis, BAL 235 1006 4.3 7 142.6 -152 -1060 -1.0 -7 -148.0 1979 Earl Campbell, HOU 401 33 368 1697 4.6 19 283.7 25.4 670 778 ‘80 Earl Campbell, HOU 373 1934 5.2 13 271.4 5 237 0.6 -6 -12.3 1980 Earl Campbell, HOU 400 27 373 1934 5.2 13 271.4 26.4 1043 1178 ‘81 Earl Campbell, HOU 361 1376 3.8 10 197.6 -12 -558 -1.4 -3 -73.8 1994 Natrone Means, SD 400 57 343 1350 3.9 12 207.0 23.3 503 560 ‘95 Natrone Means, SD 186 730 3.9 5 103.0 -157 -620 0.0 -7 -104.0 1997 Dorsey Levens, GB 400 71 329 1435 4.4 7 185.5 28.3 491 606 ‘98 Dorsey Levens, GB 115 378 3.3 1 43.8 -214 -1057 -1.1 -6 -141.7 1985 Gerald Riggs, ATL 397 0 397 1719 4.3 10 231.9 25.8 928 937 ‘86 Gerald Riggs, ATL 343 1327 3.9 9 186.7 -54 -392 -0.4 -1 -45.2 1994 Emmitt Smith, DAL 395 27 368 1484 4.0 21 274.4 26.3 1630 1835 ‘95 Emmitt Smith, DAL 377 1773 4.7 25 327.3 9 289 0.7 4 52.9 2003 ricky williams, mia 392 0 392 1372 3.5 9 191.2 27.3 1589 1595 ‘04 ricky williams, mar 0 0 0.0 0 0.0 -392 -1372 -3.5 -9 -191.2 1985 Walter Payton, CHI 391 67 324 1551 4.8 9 209.1 32.1 3371 3519 ‘86 Walter Payton, CHI 321 1333 4.2 8 181.3 -3 -218 -0.6 -1 -27.8 1999 Edgerrin James, IND 389 20 369 1553 4.2 13 233.3 22.1 369 389 ‘00 Edgerrin James, IND 387 1709 4.4 13 248.9 18 156 0.2 0 15.6 1988 Eric Dickerson, IND 388 0 388 1659 4.3 14 249.9 29.0 2136 2284 ‘89 Eric Dickerson, IND 314 1311 4.2 7 173.1 -74 -348 -0.1 -7 -76.8 1983 Curt Warner, SEA 387 52 335 1449 4.3 13 222.9 23.5 335 387 ‘84 Curt Warner, SEA 10 40 4.0 0 4.0 -325 -1409 -0.3 -13 -218.9 1979 Walter Payton, CHI 385 16 369 1610 4.4 14 245.0 26.1 1548 1583 ‘80 Walter Payton, CHI 317 1460 4.6 6 182.0 -52 -150 0.2 -8 -63.0 2005 Clinton Portis, WAS 385 33 352 1516 4.3 11 217.6 25.0 1258 1308 ‘06 Clinton Portis, WAS 127 523 4.1 7 94.3 -225 -993 -0.2 -4 -123.3 2002 Ricky Williams, MIA 383 0 383 1853 4.8 16 281.3 26.3 1197 1203 ‘03 Ricky Williams, MIA 392 1372 3.5 9 191.2 9 -481 -1.3 -7 -90.1 TOP 40 AVG 415 46 369 1651 4.5 14 247.2 26.7 1240 1342 TOP 40 AVG 266 1104 4.1 8 160.1 -103 -547 -0.3 -5 -87.1 2003 Stephen Davis, CAR 382 64 318 1444 4.5 8 192.4 30.5 1701 1765 ‘04 Stephen Davis, WAS 24 92 3.8 0 9.2 -294 -1352 -0.7 -8 -183.2 1981 Tony Dorsett, DAL 380 38 342 1646 4.8 4 188.6 28.4 1368 1568 ‘82 Tony Dorsett, DAL 177 745 4.2 5 104.5 -165 -901 -0.6 1 -84.1 1981 George Rogers, NO 378 0 378 1674 4.4 13 245.4 23.7 378 378 ‘82 George Rogers, NO 122 535 4.4 3 71.5 -256 -1139 0.0 -10 -173.9 1979 W. Montgomery, PHI 377 39 338 1512 4.5 9 205.2 26.0 642 695 ‘80 W. Montgomery, PHI 193 778 4.0 8 125.8 -145 -734 -0.5 -1 -79.4 1978 Earl Campbell, HOU 377 75 302 1450 4.8 13 223.0 24.4 302 377 ‘79 Earl Campbell, HOU 368 1697 4.6 19 283.7 66 247 -0.2 6 60.7 TOP 45 AVG 411 45 366 1640 4.5 13 243.1 26.7 1198 1298 TOP 45 AVG 256 1067 4.2 8 155.5 -109 -572 -0.3 -5 -87.6 You'll note that more players are included now, as obviously more players have 375 combined carries than 375 carries in the regular season alone. I'm a little nervous about including the playoff carries in the sense that a player with 400 carries in 20 games probably does not wear down as much as a player with 400 carries in 17 games. However, I think it's overall better to include the playoff carries, because any of them could be a crunching hit, plus playing more games has its own problems. Legend: RA All – Rushing Attempts, All (regular season + playoffs) RA P – Rushing Attempts, Playoffs RA RS – Rushing Attempts, Regular Season RYD - Rushing Yards, Regular Season YPC - Yards Per Carry, Regular Season RTD - Rushing Touchdowns, Regular Season RFP - Rushing Fantasy Points, Regular Season AGE - Age at the Beginning of 2nd Season RA RS CAREER – Career Rushing Attempts At End of 1st Season (Regular Season Only) RA ALL CAREER - Career Rushing Attempts At End of 1st Season (Including Playoffs) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SmartassBoiler 0 Posted March 13, 2007 Not in RB years he's not. I was actually speaking in terms of "RB Years". He's 27, but definitely doesn't have the career carries that most 27 year old feature RBs do. He is relatively young given that. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Swagger 0 Posted March 14, 2007 KC has done nothing this year to take the workload off LJ. Green is older, the line is older, Gonzo is locked up for a few more years as well. LJ will be good but a dropoff of 20-30% which by most standards still will be a spectacular RB to have. The question is he worth a number 2 spot in the draft. I would say no, if SJAX is there. A line from Kid Rock "History repeats itself again..." LT2 SJAX SA LJ GORE Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrJ 0 Posted March 14, 2007 I was actually speaking in terms of "RB Years". He's 27, but definitely doesn't have the career carries that most 27 year old feature RBs do. He is relatively young given that. But you're assuming that a RB's weardown is based on career workload and not age. I just simply don't think that's the case. People were saying that with Priest Holmes, and he ended up broken like all 30-31 year old RB's do. How many RB's have put up multiple top 10 FF seasons after the age of 30? You're not going to find a heck of a lot, and that includes people that had big workloads early in their career, small workloads early in their career - everyone. Unless a RB has sustained a career threatening injury, why would he "break down" as he gets older? Because his body doesn't heal as fast, and that is a skill that is paramount to a RB in the NFL. 30 year old RB's don't recuperate as fast during the week as 26 year old RB's do. No matter how much workload they've had early in their career. In RB years, 27 is not young. No matter how many career carries you have. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted March 15, 2007 Updated my post at the top of this page with more info: -total carries in the first year, including playoff carries -career carries up through the 1st year -more players As to the question of the impact of career workload vs workload from the previous season... Larry Johnson has 905 carries including postseason. Out of the top 45 backs in carries in a season (including playoffs), 16 of them had less than 1000 carries after their workhorse season. When compared to the top 45 as a whole, these 16 "fresher" backs fared slightly better than the average: TOP 45 AVG 411 45 366 1640 4.5 13 243.1 26.7 1198 1298 TOP 45 AVG 256 1067 4.2 8 155.5 -109 -572 -0.3 -5 -87.6 LESS THAN 1K RUSHES 399 39 360 1596 4.4 12 233.8 24.6 561.5 617 LESS THAN 1K RUSHES 237 1030 4.3 8 152.1 -124 -566 -0.1 -4 -81.7 Among the top 45 players... 8 increased their regular season rushing attempts the next year, 9 increased their yardage, 16 increased their average, 9 increased their TDs, and 7 increased their rushing fantasy production. Among the 16 who had less than 1000 carrer carries... 4 increased their rushing attempts, 5 increased their yardage, 7 increased their average, 3 increased their TDs, and 4 increased their rushing fantasy production. These 16 "fresher" players had averaged less productive 1st seasons when compared to the top 45 average. They averaged equally productive 2nd seasons when compared to the top 45 average. Thus their average dropoff was slightly less. A higher percentage of the "fresher" players improved their stats (ATT or YDS or YPC or TD or FP). This suggests that career workload probably has some effect (which makes sense). However, further analysis would be required to tell how much of that is career workload, and how much of that is age. Note that the top 45 were about 1 year younger than LJ on average, and the 16 backs who had less than 1000 career carries were on average about 3 years younger than LJ. Also note that all of the 16 had fewer total carries in their workhorse season than LJ. At any rate, the numbers show that a player with a heavy single-season workload should expect a significant dropoff even if they had a light career workload as LJ has. And that the likely dropoff is very close to that of players who had a heavy career workoad. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Swagger 0 Posted March 15, 2007 This about sums it up a there will be a drop off. Again debating LJ only what is his value, he is still a top 5 in my book. Unless you have auction, you have to take him if he is there. If you auction draft, then his value could be great with all the doubts being cast. Float some of this data to your league and they swim away (que Marvin's over bid now). LJ with a 15% reduction is still a great RB. LJ with a 35% reduction means there are a whole lot more options to spend your money on. I don't see anything amzaing out of KC this year, just another struggle with aging players. Who knows maybe with their draft things will look better. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted March 15, 2007 This about sums it up a there will be a drop off. Again debating LJ only what is his value, he is still a top 5 in my book. Unless you have auction, you have to take him if he is there. If you auction draft, then his value could be great with all the doubts being cast. Float some of this data to your league and they swim away (que Marvin's over bid now). LJ with a 15% reduction is still a great RB. LJ with a 35% reduction means there are a whole lot more options to spend your money on. I don't see anything amzaing out of KC this year, just another struggle with aging players. Who knows maybe with their draft things will look better. There are definitely a bunch of ways to play this. If you want him you can probably scare some people off with this info. Personally I don't play in any redraft leagues, but if I did, considering his workload last year and what's going on with his o-line, there is no way I would take him top 5. Depending on where I picked and who was available at the time, I would consider taking him in the top 10. If I grabbed him I would definitely be looking to trade him in late September. I don't see any reason to project him higher than 13 games, 260 carries, 1100 yards, and 9 TDs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted March 15, 2007 There are definitely a bunch of ways to play this. If you want him you can probably scare some people off with this info. Personally I don't play in any redraft leagues, but if I did, considering his workload last year and what's going on with his o-line, there is no way I would take him top 5. Depending on where I picked and who was available at the time, I would consider taking him in the top 10. If I grabbed him I would definitely be looking to trade him in late September. I don't see any reason to project him higher than 13 games, 260 carries, 1100 yards, and 9 TDs. I could see maybe taking LT2 Alexander SJax Gore in no particular order after LT2 - But after that, even if I were the skittish type in redraft or keeper format, I'd have a hard time saying anything but "Larry Johnson" at 1.05. I'd be interested in seeing your list. From past discussion, you know I'd take him 3rd overall, maybe even second. In redraft it seems like an even less risky proposition, since you are only bound to him for a "1 year contract" so to speak. As a keeper, he's a greater risk due to greater investment, but you could potentially get him later due to skittishness about the big season...talk down his health and grab him at 5 or 6? In either case the pick seems somewhat irrelevant because his upside of 1500-1800 yds with 20-25 TDs is so great that it more than makes up for the difference between a 1.01 and 1.05... I'd say it's reasonably safe to say his upside is greater than anyone but Tomlinson. I'm curious - do you disagree with this sentiment? If so, why? That's pretty much why I would strongly consider taking him 2nd overall...his upside more than offsets the risk. I think the Chiefs will have a better and more consistent offense next year and LJ will be able to do more with less, if you understand my meaning. And I'm not entirely convinced that anyone taken over him has that much less risk. That's a part of this equasion that's perplexing to me - you have said a few times you wouldn't consider taking him in the top 5 players, and I agree you make a compelling case for your belief that it's a near certainty that LJ is going to get hurt...but let's take a look at those others you'd feel more comfortable with: SJax: 346 carries last year. Nearly 100 more than his career high. Many are touting him as the clearcut 1.02 RB for FFB - no fears he could suffer a similar breakdown after carrying the load in Stl? The Rams brought in Steven Davis for short yardage for a reason...I don't expect SJax to take a leap forward beyond 13 TDs - maybe Stl improves on D and SJax gets a few more chances...I still think his upside is within 5% of his 2006 numbers. It wouldn't shock me to see Stl bring in another short yardage back this year if SDavis is gone. Maybe in the draft. Shaun Alexander: Broke his foot last year and never really recovered. Maybe he comes back, maybe not - that's a tricky place to break a bone. Optimists here last year said he'd be back in a month...8 weeks later he tried to come back and it was ugly. I think Alexander is a top 5 pick, but to say he's without risk would be somewhat foolish. He had a similar upward trend to SJax - 326 carries => 353 => 370 => Ouch! => 2007 ? Frank Gore? Knees, shoulders - hey, I love the guy but to say he's not a risk is whack. Likewse with Westbrook, Rudi Johnson, Portis, Ronnie Brown...maybe Willie Parker? Maybe...young, healthy, but he too had a lot of carries last year and at 5'10, 209, 337 carries seems like a lot. Will he develop Westbrook-itis? Anyway, I'm not trying to bash you at all - really. You make an interesting case to suggest LJ is more likely to get hurt next year than many backs out there. But I can't see how it's really useful without 5 clear cut candites to take instead. As it stands, I see most of the backs ahead of him having their own risks but with less upside. Gore will likely continue to lose GL carries, SJax may as well. Westbrook is fragile and has proven to be somewhat unreliable, though a beast while healthy. Parker is undersized and may lose GL carries, Rudi can't catch. Aside from LT2, Alexander is about the only one I could say has similar upside with less risk, but I have questions about his production behind an O-Line without Hutchinson, and his ability to fully recover from his foot injury...so ok, maybe I'd go LT/SA/LJ...but I still see them as "the big 3" regardless of 400+ carries. One thing's for sure. For those of us who like "stud RB", 2007 should be a good year. It looks like you can get a good back anywhere in the top 12. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted March 15, 2007 In either case the pick seems somewhat irrelevant because his upside of 1500-1800 yds with 20-25 TDs is so great that it more than makes up for the difference between a 1.01 and 1.05... I'd say it's reasonably safe to say his upside is greater than anyone but Tomlinson. I'm curious - do you disagree with this sentiment? If so, why? I disagree, I do not think there is a realistic chance that LJ will score 20 TDs, let alone 25, and I think 1500 yards is highly unlikely as well, let alone 1800. Personally I do not see him as an upside guy at all this year. I think it's much more likely that he misses 8+ games than it is that he finishes in the top 3. Of the 45 guys on the above list there are only 4 guys that followed it up with the kind of season you are talking about as being LJ's upside... Earl Campbell '79, Emmitt Smith '92, Emmitt Smith '95, and Terrell Davis '98. What do the latter three guys have in common? All were on Super Bowl winning teams, with world-class offensive lines and a Hall of Fame quarterback. KC's o-line is likely to be a mess. I like Trent Green but he's not in the Elway/Aikman class and who knows if he will be the same after his severe injury last year. I also think LJ is a type of runner to take more punishment than Davis and Smith. Campbell was the type to punish his own body, but his workhorse year was also significantly lighter than Johnson's (114 fewer regular season carries, and his playoff carries were spread out over 3 games). Campbell, like Davis and Smith, was younger than LJ when he did it. In fact he was coming off his rookie year. Lastly, IMHO Johnson is nowhere near as good a running back as Campbell was, relative to the league talent level at the time. Smith, Davis, and Campbell in their season 1s were all still going strong at the end of their playoff run... LJ's performance in the wild card game makes me wonder if he was worn out before the season even ended. To me, LJ doesn't have much going for him by comparison. So those are the few examples of big upside, the exceptions to the trend... On the other end, a whopping 40% of the guys on this list failed to even reach 1000 yards the following year. That's a part of this equasion that's perplexing to me - you have said a few times you wouldn't consider taking him in the top 5 players, and I agree you make a compelling case for your belief that it's a near certainty that LJ is going to get hurt... LJ is the only player in the league that I have done projections for yet, and I have only done projections for him for the sake of this discussion. For '06 I had 9 guys projected for more rushing production than what I project for LJ in '07. Suffice it to say I am quite sure I will have at least 5 players ranked ahead of LJ come September. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BMoney 0 Posted March 15, 2007 LJ is no Tiki...he has a ways to go to prove that he is.... Tiki always rose up in the playoffs and never had the line LJ had... or had..as more of LJs line goes away, i think it gets worse.... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted March 15, 2007 or had..as more of LJs line goes away, i think it gets worse.... this year's draft seems particularly deep in O-Linemen and I have to believe this will be a top priority on draft day for the Chiefs. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Swagger 0 Posted March 20, 2007 this year's draft seems particularly deep in O-Linemen and I have to believe this will be a top priority on draft day for the Chiefs. I am curious if KC does draft well and picks up 1-2 lineman this year.... is this a skilled position that can be "plugged in" as a rookie? I was understanding that O-line is something that must develop, chemistry, all that coach talk. Hutchinson came out in 2001 as a top guard and has excelled. Leonard Davis also came in 2001 as a tackle and has not done much. What does KC need to do to make folks start to fear LJ this year? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dehaven123 31 Posted March 21, 2007 Just weighing in. I'll keep it simple. Im not so much concerned about his carries and their impact. IMO, Im more concerned about the quickly declining O-line, still having no emerging WR, an aging Gonzalez, and the impending(not definate) departure of the aging, yet reliable, T. Green. Personally, I dont quite grasp the decision to let Green go versus Huard in 07. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mlavwilson 0 Posted March 22, 2007 t.j, are you an employee here? You have a lot of posts! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted March 22, 2007 t.j, are you an employee here? You have a lot of posts! 3 posts in 2 years and one is only to question a user's post count? I'm positive you're not an alias. I am also positive you aren't a complete assclown. and today is opposite day. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted March 22, 2007 3 posts in 2 years and one is only to question a user's post count? I'm positive you're not an alias. I am also positive you aren't a complete assclown. and today is opposite day. What's the attack for? mlavwilson's first post is 8 months after registration... maybe registration was for something on fftoday.com as opposed to the fftodayforums. I have heard there are people who just read and don't post, although it's hard to imagine. Anyway no, I'm not on staff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted March 22, 2007 What's the attack for? mlavwilson's first post is 8 months after registration... maybe registration was for something on fftoday.com as opposed to the fftodayforums. I have heard there are people who just read and don't post, although it's hard to imagine. Anyway no, I'm not on staff. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bishop82 61 Posted March 22, 2007 I have heard there are people who just read and don't post, although it's hard to imagine. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gepetto 997 Posted March 22, 2007 Chiefs RB Johnson... Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mlavwilson 0 Posted March 23, 2007 What's the attack for? mlavwilson's first post is 8 months after registration... maybe registration was for something on fftoday.com as opposed to the fftodayforums. I have heard there are people who just read and don't post, although it's hard to imagine. Anyway no, I'm not on staff. I joined the site last fall for the weekly projections. I visit http://www.fantasyfootballcafe.com/ on a regular basis, it has a lot more activity than any other forum out there. But it's a long off season, so I am floating around trying to get my fill. But thanks for the warm reception guys Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cmh6476 767 Posted April 16, 2007 her done dunn it with cumart, i bet he does it with lj as well Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted April 16, 2007 her done dunn it with cumart, i bet he does it with lj as well No he didn't. YEAR PLAYER RA RA RA RYD YPC RTD RFP AGE RA RS RA ALL All P RS CAREER CAREER ‘YR PLAYER RA RYD YPC RTD RFP RA RS RYD YPC TD FP RS Diff Diff Diff Diff Diff 2004 Curtis Martin, NYJ 408 37 371 1697 4.6 12 241.7 32.3 3298 3480 ‘05 Curtis Martin, NYJ 220 735 3.3 5 103.5 -151 -962 -1.3 -7 -138.2 Herm finished CMart off. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cmh6476 767 Posted April 16, 2007 No he didn't. Herm finished CMart off. so I take it you are just going to ignore years 2001-2004 to support your extravagant hypothesis? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted April 16, 2007 so I take it you are just going to ignore years 2001-2004 to support your extravagant hypothesis? I know you're late to the party here and your intellect is weak, but there's nothing extravagant about it. Guys who take an on an extreme workload suffer the next year the vast majority of the time. Others have done similar studies so it's not my hypothesis. Martin's '00 to '03 seasons were not an extreme workload, So it's not surprising that he was fine from '01 to '04. (From '00 to '03 Martin averaged 320 carries per year, including playoffs, with a high of 349. Then in '04 he carried 408 times and you saw what happened the next year.) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
cmh6476 767 Posted April 16, 2007 I know you're late to the party here and your intellect is weak, but there's nothing extravagant about it. Guys who take an on an extreme workload suffer the next year the vast majority of the time. Others have done similar studies so it's not my hypothesis. Martin's '00 to '03 seasons were not an extreme workload, So it's not surprising that he was fine from '01 to '04. (From '00 to '03 Martin averaged 320 carries per year, including playoffs, with a high of 349. Then in '04 he carried 408 times and you saw what happened the next year.) then lj will be the exception to the rule, end of debate, ywia Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted May 21, 2007 Bump for SJax vs. LJ thread Now, Johnson has carried the ball a TON over the past two seasons. This has many fantasy experts concerned, but what people need to remember is that before Larry Johnson rushed the ball 765 combine times in 2006 and 2005, he only rushed the ball 120 times total in 2004, and only 20 times in 2003. Why people are freaking out about his 2006 workload is beyond me! LaDainian Tomlinson has never carried the ball under 300 times in his six-year career and he has rushed the ball 688 times combine for the 2006 and 2005 seasons… yet, it is LJ’s one-time workload (416 carries) that is being tagged as the career-killer? There is only a 77-carry difference between L.J. and L.T. over the past two seasons. I only bring up LT to prove that LJ isn’t at risk because of one overworked season. The truth is, Johnson has only one full season as a starter on his resume, and before that, Johnson started just 12 other games in the NFL. His wheels are fresh and if LJ gets hurt in 2007, it won’t be because he ran the ball 416 times the year prior. Clearly, the author of that article has not done or seen any real research on single-season workloads like LJ's. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted May 21, 2007 Bump for SJax vs. LJ thread Clearly, the author of that article has not done or seen any real research on single-season workloads like LJ's. Agreed. Why people are freaking out about his 2006 workload is beyond me! LaDainian Tomlinson has never carried the ball under 300 times in his six-year career and he has rushed the ball 688 times combine for the 2006 and 2005 seasons… yet, it is LJ’s one-time workload (416 carries) that is being tagged as the career-killer? There is only a 77-carry difference between L.J. and L.T. over the past two seasons. For reference 77 carries is the equivalent to 3 heavy workload games...don't know if I'd refer to that as 'just'. ...if LJ gets hurt in 2007, it won’t be because he ran the ball 416 times the year prior. Statistical history would say otherwise. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Foghorn Leghorn 0 Posted May 21, 2007 Agreed. Why people are freaking out about his 2006 workload is beyond me! LaDainian Tomlinson has never carried the ball under 300 times in his six-year career and he has rushed the ball 688 times combine for the 2006 and 2005 seasons… yet, it is LJ’s one-time workload (416 carries) that is being tagged as the career-killer? There is only a 77-carry difference between L.J. and L.T. over the past two seasons. For reference 77 carries is the equivalent to 3 heavy workload games...don't know if I'd refer to that as 'just'. ...if LJ gets hurt in 2007, it won’t be because he ran the ball 416 times the year prior. Statistical history would say otherwise. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted May 21, 2007 ...if LJ gets hurt in 2007, it won’t be because he ran the ball 416 times the year prior. Statistical history would say otherwise. So how do we know that it's the 416 season that did him in, and not one odd hit he took in 2005? How do we know that CuMart got hurt as a direct result of his 408 carry season, and that it wasn't a cumulative effect from a 3500+ carry career with season after season over 300 carries? Not that I disagree entirely - I think a heavy workload can contribute to injury. But I also believe that cumulative stats matter just as much, if not more. I don't agree that "statistical history indicates otherwise" - I believe that one can use stats to paint many different pictures and that this is no exception. One could easily argue that "statistical history proves that any RB who carries over 2500 times will break down with soft tissue injuries". Just playing devil's advocate - I don't think anything's been proven beyond doubt, and IMO since LJ has relatively low "milage" on his legs, it's as good a chance that he defies the odds and stays healthy this year as the chance that he breaks down. What will really irritate me is if on the off chance that he breaks a leg or collar bone or sustains some other non-soft tissue injury, that someone will point to his 416 carries and say, "see, I told you so!". At this point it's a coin flip, IMO. Nothing is guaranteed - guys who carried the rock 200 times last year could tear an ACL while guys who carried it 350 last year could stay the picture of health. IMO soft tissue damage is extremely difficult to predict. All the theories are nice, but they're still just theories. Should be interesting to see what happens with LJ this year, but IMO it's the O-Line and QB situations that will dictate whether his value matches his ADP or not. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted May 22, 2007 Scoot, I appreciate the debate and you bring up some solid pts similiar to what else I've heard: 'what about a random hit', 'anybody can be hurt on any given play', 'what about the cumulative', etc. And I'm not going to try to convince anyone...all I know is my research has yielded that: -Just 3 of 19 times (15.7%) have RBs who attained 400 f/carries (note my articles f/carries, not even actual 400 carries) came back following year with equal or slightly less production -Just 8 of 45 (17.7%) times have RBs who attained 370 f/carries came back following year with equal or slightly less production -26 of 45 (57.7%) Heavy Workload RBs missed at least 1 game 12 of 45 (26.6%) Heavy Workload RBs missed 1-3 games 13 of 45 (28.8%) Heavy Workload RBs missed 4+ games For comparison, avg of top20 RBs who missed at least 1 game was 36% -7 of 45 (15.5%) RBs had an increase in f/carries 38 of 45 (84.4%) RBs had a decrease in f/carries Average decrease of f/carries for those RBs for the season: 85.3 Now you could have that ONE last drink before driving home, ignoring the statistical data that that ONE extra beer put you at 84.3% chance of getting into an accident and die b/c...hell it's 'just one more beer' <insert 'it's just 77 more carries'>...but me? I may have to think about it before having that ONE last drink. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted May 22, 2007 Scoot, I appreciate the debate and you bring up some solid pts similiar to what else I've heard: 'what about a random hit', 'anybody can be hurt on any given play', 'what about the cumulative', etc. And I'm not going to try to convince anyone...all I know is my research has yielded that: -Just 3 of 19 times (15.7%) have RBs who attained 400 f/carries (note my articles f/carries, not even actual 400 carries) came back following year with equal or slightly less production -Just 8 of 45 (17.7%) times have RBs who attained 370 f/carries came back following year with equal or slightly less production -26 of 45 (57.7%) Heavy Workload RBs missed at least 1 game 12 of 45 (26.6%) Heavy Workload RBs missed 1-3 games 13 of 45 (28.8%) Heavy Workload RBs missed 4+ games For comparison, avg of top20 RBs who missed at least 1 game was 36% -7 of 45 (15.5%) RBs had an increase in f/carries 38 of 45 (84.4%) RBs had a decrease in f/carries Average decrease of f/carries for those RBs for the season: 85.3 Now you could have that ONE last drink before driving home, ignoring the statistical data that that ONE extra beer put you at 84.3% chance of getting into an accident and die b/c...hell it's 'just one more beer' <insert 'it's just 77 more carries'>...but me? I may have to think about it before having that ONE last drink. A fair argument, and as always very thorough and well stated....but, as always with this sort of statistical analysis I tend to see some holes. The major one here is using an aggregate % to make your point. For example, your "26 of 45 (57.7%) Heavy Workload RBs missed at least 1 game" - I'm not sure what you're proving here - is one game missed better than, worse than or consistent with league average? I mean, is using the top 20 a fair comparison here? Obviously if they're top 20 they probably didn't miss a ton of action so that would seem skewed. League average would be a much more fair basis of comparison. What about 1-3 games? Seems to me that one could spin these first two either way...I could point to the 1st % and argue that 57% of those players with heavy workloads managed to start 15 games the following year and call it a glowing success. How is missing one game more relevant than starting 15? It seems to me that RBs tend to miss 1-3 games regardless of age, prior season workload, etc. Very few are durable enough to sustain consecutive games streaks. The last run I can recall was Fred Taylor (of all people) who didn't miss a game for 30-something starts. That 1-3 game figure represents another 26.6% of RBs who had a heavy workload - so now we're talking about 84.3% of all RBs who had a heavy workload the previous season starting an average of 14.x games the following year. Again - that seems to be about league average, so I'm struggling to see how it supports the conclusions completely. When it comes to YPC and number of carries, this seems to be stronger - but still, not conclusive in light of 80+% of those backs coming back to start 88% of their games the following season. It is an interesting debate though, and as they say, "time will tell". But if I am picking 5th and LJ is sitting there, I'll take him without a hesitation and will believe I got a bargain. As I mentioned before in the "pick 1.02" topic, when you're in the top 2, there would seem to be safer options like SJax - and I base that on the balance of the offense and quality of line Jackson has around him. I think the more interesting question/debate would be who one might select of LJ or Alexander. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted May 22, 2007 A fair argument, and as always very thorough and well stated....but, as always with this sort of statistical analysis I tend to see some holes. The major one here is using an aggregate % to make your point. For example, your "26 of 45 (57.7%) Heavy Workload RBs missed at least 1 game" - I'm not sure what you're proving here - is one game missed better than, worse than or consistent with league average? I mean, is using the top 20 a fair comparison here? Obviously if they're top 20 they probably didn't miss a ton of action so that would seem skewed. League average would be a much more fair basis of comparison. What about 1-3 games? Seems to me that one could spin these first two either way...I could argue that 57% of those players with heavy workloads managed to start 15 games the following year and call it a glowing success. How is missing one game more relevant than starting 15? It seems to me that RBs tend to miss 1-3 games regardless of age, prior season workload, etc. Very few are durable enough to sustain consecutive games streaks. The last run I can recall was Fred Taylor (of all people) who didn't miss a game for 30-something starts. That 1-3 game figure represents another 26.6% of RBs who had a heavy workload - so now we're talking about 84.3% of all RBs who had a heavy workload the previous season starting an average of 14.x games the following year. Again - that seems to be about league average, so I'm struggling to see how it supports the conclusions completely. I think those were just side points by NAn and not indended to completely support the conclusion. But, since we're on the topic, what really struck me when I read NAn's numbers is this: If you combine the facts that only 8 of 45 heavy workload RBs come back with equal or slightly less production, and 26 of 45 missed 1 or more games.. that means that there were 19 guys (45 minus 26) who lasted the whole season, yet only 8 came back with equal or slightly less production? That brings us to a key point... even if these heavy workload guys make it through the following year without a serious injury, they are still not the same guy they were the year before, the vast majority of the time. Also, back to the beer analogy, which was a great one by NAn. It's not just a beer, it's a beer on top of other beers in a situation where too many beers is dangerous. Let's ignore for a moment the statistical history that shows how almost everyone with a similar workload to LJ had a huge dropoff. And let's hypothesize for a moment that you are right that it's mostly just individual bad hits that wear down an RB, not an accumulation of routine hits... Wouldn't it be common sense to suspect that a RB is more vulnerable to take a bad hit when he is getting tired at the end of a workhorse game? Wouldn't it follow that a guy like Larry Johnson who is taking hits after 25 to 30 tiring carries, every other week, is more likely to have tweaked his body here and there? He may not have had any problems that caused him to miss a game last year, but he and many of these other guys who had a heavy workload may have gotten hurt a little bit at a time late in these big games. Just a hypothesis and I'm not even sure there's anything to it... the numbers just show us that these guys almost always struggle the next year, they don't tell us why. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted May 22, 2007 And let's hypothesize for a moment that you are right that it's mostly just individual bad hits that wear down an RB, not an accumulation of routine hits... Actually, that wasn't exactly my point. I mentioned that as one possibility, but I primarily believe that cumulative wear & tear, as in carries added up over multiple seasons, has as much to do with the propensity for injury as would a single heavy load season. So I maily agree that it is an accumulation of routine hits. Where I differ is that I see it as an accumulation over a career, rather than over a single season. That's my main point of contention with the single season workload theory - in many of those cases, that single heavy season followed careers of "normal" usage (300-350 carries) which makes it difficult to ascertain whether or not that one heavy season was the root cause of the injury, or merely the straw that broke the camel's back (example: CuMart). If the latter, then that would support my contention that having a relatively low amount of carries prior to his heavy season may help LJ to be in the statistical minority. But I certainly concede that the numbers are impressive enough to make it something of an anomaly if he does buck that trend. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted May 22, 2007 but I primarily believe that cumulative wear & tear, as in carries added up over multiple seasons, has as much to do with the propensity for injury as would a single heavy load season. So I maily agree that it is an accumulation of routine hits. Where I differ is that I see it as an accumulation over a career, rather than over a single season. Ok. So why do you believe that when I showed, among the single heavy season guys, that the ones who had less of a career workload than LJ did not fare significantly better than those who had a heavier career workload than LJ? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted May 22, 2007 As tj said, they were just additional ‘side’ notes to emphasize the pt. The cumulative issue is one that ALWAYS comes up with the articles and is a valid one. It’s not much but here’s what I can share about that. More often than not, a RB doesn’t start out as a b/up with 100 carries and then jumps to 370…more often than not, the RB builds towards that 370. Cumar was mentioned in this thread: solid example. I’d cite Terrel Davis, Eddie George off top of my head as well. Regardless, most 370 RBs meet this ‘building up’ criteria. Yes, would be a better indicator to know how much a RB built up prior to the 370 year, but guess my pt is…assume that there has been significant mileage by RB. Beyond that all I know is after that 370 f/carry benchmark the numbers are pretty telling. And that’s no accident. I’ve said before many times ‘370 wasn’t a number I picked out of a hat’…I looked at several possible benchmarks but settled on 370 b/c that’s when data started to say something’. Numbers like 350-360 the success v fall off percentage floated around 50% give or take…what use is that for Ffers? But at 370, for WHATEVER REASON, the numbers started to look like fall off percentages of 70%, 75%, 80%…NOW there’s something that could help FFERS. I’m going to try a couple more analogies, they’re likely not the best, but here goes. · This first one isn’t about the numbers as much as your mentality of accepting the 370 research: I change my oil every 3000 miles…do I know exactly why? Yes, it has to do with maximizing performance, but beyond that I honestly don’t know. All I do know is that when I was a knucklehead in high school/early college I didn’t change my oil religiously at 3000 and my cars didn’t last so long, I spent a lot on maintenance and they didn’t perform the best. But when I did start changing my oil at 3000 my cars lasted longer, had less maintenance and peformed better. Now just knowing this…do I really need to know they whys and wherefores of why my car performs better or is it just good enough that I just do it? So do I really need to know why 370 is the ‘magic number’ as opposed to 350 or 360 or a cumulative amount or is just enough that I know (b/c of the stats provided) · This next one is about the numbers. More car talk. I think the average mileage for a year for a vehicle is about 15000 miles, just between commuting, regular travel, occasional long trip. Now say Scooter has CarA and tj has CarB and since they’re best friends J decide to go on a cross country trip together and by year’s end have put on 25000 miles on both their cars. Now yes, the prior mileage of each car will be a factor in each cars future performance…but would it be safe to say that after that amount of mileage that BOTH cars future performance could be affected negatively. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Texansfan 0 Posted May 22, 2007 You guys overanalyze this stuff. You can read stats and history all day, but the bottom line is every player reacts differently. And why focus only on ONE season? Why not the long haul? Last season was his first full season carrying the load, so in that aspect he really doesn't have much mileage on him. Add his carries the last 2 years and it's less than the majority of feature backs. Not to mention he's still only 27. He's never had a major injury and will have had a whole offseason to mend any nagging injuries. Personally I'm more concerned with his offensive line, and the fact that he's got a relatively difficult schedule. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
football_scooter 0 Posted May 22, 2007 Now yes, the prior mileage of each car will be a factor in each cars future performance…but would it be safe to say that after that amount of mileage that BOTH cars future performance could be affected negatively. "could" seems to be the key word here though. As I said already - I am not saying that heavy workloads don't increase the risk of injury or performance drop-off. Obviously, as evidenced in your research, the risk is significantly higher. Is it eye opening? For sure. Is is cause to not draft Larry Johnson at 1.05 or (gasp!) 1.06? Perhaps to you, yes - to me, no. But I would consider the gamble, because it's not an absolute. the cumulative mileage and maintenance on each car will be as much a factor in the car's future performance as the one grueling year. And like running backs, each car is a bit different. Is it a Fiat or a Toyota? Give me the Toyota with 100K miles on it over the Fiat with 30K miles on it. Likewise with RBs. Would you rather have a Brian Westbrook type back with 4 X 300 carry seasons behind him or a Larry Johnson type back with 2 X 200 carry, 1X 350 carry and 1 X 370 carry seasons behind him? Using your contentions, the Westbrook-type back would be the no brainer. Again - I agree that the risk is there. You've shown that beyond a doubt, IMO. I'm just not certain how much weight to give to the single heavy load season Vs the career workload, and I'm not certain that one theory can be applied to all RBs, since they're all so different. As with the Fiat Vs Toyota analogy, one could argue that Larry Johnson is somewhat unique in his combination of power and speed and that other similarly built backs have not suffered on par with the RBs used for comparison. Meaning, in a way you're comparing apples to oranges by comparing every back on the list of 370+ carries to LJ, when they aren't built the same, nor did they have similar history. the unifying theme is the number of carries, but that isn't necessarily a like comparison. In any case, it's all excellent food for thought. I'm not necessarily unconvinced - to the contrary, I believe there is more risk after engaging in this discussion than perhaps I believed at the beginning of it, so your message didn't entirely fall on deaf ears. You guys overanalyze this stuff. You can read stats and history all day, but the bottom line is every player reacts differently. And why focus only on ONE season? Why not the long haul? Last season was his first full season carrying the load, so in that aspect he really doesn't have much mileage on him. Add his carries the last 2 years and it's less than the majority of feature backs. Not to mention he's still only 27. He's never had a major injury and will have had a whole offseason to mend any nagging injuries. Personally I'm more concerned with his offensive line, and the fact that he's got a relatively difficult schedule. This is pretty much a summary of my standpoint, but without the $5 words. but as TJ and NAn have eloquently put, there are other factors to consider, and I appreciate the in-depth analysis - nothing is an absolute and there will be variance from back to back. But seeing the numbers does give one a perspective of the risk factors, and how heavily to weigh that risk at the time you're drafting. For that, I think this sort of exercise is valuable from both sides of the debate. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.j 35 Posted May 22, 2007 You guys overanalyze this stuff. You can read stats and history all day, but the bottom line is every player reacts differently. And why focus only on ONE season? Why not the long haul? Last season was his first full season carrying the load, so in that aspect he really doesn't have much mileage on him. Add his carries the last 2 years and it's less than the majority of feature backs. Not to mention he's still only 27. He's never had a major injury and will have had a whole offseason to mend any nagging injuries. Personally I'm more concerned with his offensive line, and the fact that he's got a relatively difficult schedule. Methinks you have not been paying attention. Two answer your questions: Why focus on one season? Because we're talking about LJ, and what he did that is significant is have one (extremely) heavy workload season. So the issue is what that one season means, if anything. You ask why long haul and age were not considered. They were! Check out my first two posts on page 2. The guys younger than LJ and the guys with less of a career workload than LJ didn't fare better than the the older guys or the guys with a larger career workload. I am open to the possibility that there is something special about LJ that makes him less vulnerable to a breakdown than these other guys were. But I have yet to hear a compelling argument as to what that might be. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted May 22, 2007 Not to mention he's still only 27. He's never had a major injury and will have had a whole offseason to mend any nagging injuries. This statement above could be attached almost verbatim to Edgerring James prior to the 2001 season, ALSO after a 2000 season where he attained a 400 f/carry season. Guess what happened in that 2001 season? James went down in game 6 and was lost for the season. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NAn 39 Posted May 22, 2007 TJ Thanks tj, that’s an excellent pt that is often missed in the data. Remember I said that RBs are often building toward a 370 season and that 370 season is often the peak a RB will reach. (believe 7% of total RB seasons has a RB attained a 370 season) So, often times, regardless of if they miss time or not, the only way to go is down. This in itself should be considered when doing projections. I believe the average decrease even for players who missed ZERO games was about 26 f/carries…not much, but that’s potentially an entire game less in carries. Note, that average decrease in carries of those who actually DID miss any games is around 86 f/carries (like 80 carries/12 recs)…that’s potential 3-4 entire games less in carries. SCOOTER Dammit Scooter...I knew those analogies would be ripped apart and of course by you. As you have through this thread, you articulated your arguements and counter arguements very well. Normally I'd say agree to disagree, but this thread continues to renew the debate, so I say we just keep going to someone drops...like LJ will in week3. ALL I think with the ‘history of’ the statistics…numbers attached to RBs over last 20 years…may be hard to ‘visualize’ how the research translates. Let’s try to address that. Since the original article/research PRIOR to ’04 season, these are RBs who attained the 370 f/carry benchmark. Jamal Lewis Ahman Green Deuce Mcallister Fred Taylor Curtis Martin Edgerrin James Tiki Barber Shaun Alexander That’s 8 players…consider all the stats and in particular compare top (just these 8 players) v italicized (entire history of research)…think you may see some consistency in the percentages. If that means anything to you great...if not, well then we'll just continue with How many met or slightly decreased in production: 1 of 8 (12.75%) How many fell of considerably (20%+) in production 7 of 8 (87.25%) Just 8 of 45 (17.7%...the converse being 83.3%) times have RBs who attained 370 f/carries came back following year with equal or slightly less production How many missed 1 game 2 of 8 (25%) How many missed 1-3 games 4 of 8 (50%) How many 4+ games 2 of 8 (25%) 26 of 45 (57.7%) Heavy Workload RBs missed at least 1 game 12 of 45 (26.6%) Heavy Workload RBs missed 1-3 games 13 of 45 (28.8%) Heavy Workload RBs missed 4+ games How many increased in f/carries 0 of 8 (0%) How many decreased in f/carries 7 0f 8 (87.5%) 7 of 45 (15.5%) RBs had an increase in f/carries 38 of 45 (84.4%) RBs had a decrease in f/carries How many who did NOT miss games increase in f/carries 0 of 2 ( 0%) How many who did NOT miss games decrease in f/carries 2 of 2 (100%) Average decrease in carries of those who did NOT miss any games: 27 Average decrease in carries of those who did miss any games: 117 Average decrease of f/carries for those RBs who did NOT miss any games: 26.3 Average decrease of f/carries for those RBs who did miss any games : 85.3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
