Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Super Cubs

CMC 403 touches damaged goods?

Recommended Posts

400 seems to be a taboo number for RB. Unless your name is Emmitt Smith after getting 400 touches most RB start to slow down. Since 2009 only Chris Johnson DeMarko Murray, LeVeon Bell, and McCaffery have had over 400 touches in a season. For the other 3 it was the peak of their careers. In the past 40 years Emmitt, Dickerson, and Tomlinson seem to be exceptions to the rule. I just don't see CMC making that group.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Super Cubs said:

400 seems to be a taboo number for RB. Unless your name is Emmitt Smith after getting 400 touches most RB start to slow down. Since 2009 only Chris Johnson DeMarko Murray, LeVeon Bell, and McCaffery have had over 400 touches in a season. For the other 3 it was the peak of their careers. In the past 40 years Emmitt, Dickerson, and Tomlinson seem to be exceptions to the rule. I just don't see CMC making that group.

So based on what you just typed about Mccaffery and his work load, where would you rank him based on your post, let’s say where would you rank him just based on the rb postion?

 Thanks for the reply.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, weepaws said:

So based on what you just typed about Mccaffery and his work load, where would you rank him based on your post, let’s say where would you rank him just based on the rb postion?

 Thanks for the reply.  

#1 or tier 1 with Barkley and Zeke and hope he finishes in the top 10. 2019 was a ridiculous year for him and I don't see him repeating it.  Just look at Barkley 2018 to 2019. Zeke may be the safer pick then again his production did drop off some from 2018 where his touches peaked to 2019.  Where do you have McCaffery ranked at the RB position and do you see him repeating 2019 numbers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So I’m now trying to understand what your saying, I don’t want to get this wrong , your saying he won’t score as many points as last season then is that right, because you also said you see him as the best rb once again or a top 1 rb is that correct? 

And if that’s correct, I don’t disagree, I don’t ever ever see anyone repeating what they scored the season before, and for just a ranking, non ppr I’m ranking him right now third. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, he will not score as many points as last season. I'm thinking a 20% decrease in ppr production.  And yes I can see and understands a argument made for him being the #1 pick.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's unlikely he has as big a season as he did last season, but I think he'll still have a pretty good season.

He'll probably be top 5 RB. He won't last much longer though with this much use. It may not catch up to him just yet, but it won't be long

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the high target count may have come at just the right time.  Players are going to get extra time off this season, so I think he'll have more heal time than normal.  For this coming year, I think he'll be fine, considering his age.  To me, the high count is more long-term damaging than short-term.

 

If you assume even a 25% drop in production and the top 5 RB's from last year have a 15% increase, McCaffrey would be RB3 next season.  I'd still take McCaffrey #1 overall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's kind of like pocket Aces in Texas Hold 'Em.  They only win about 60% of the time, and lots of really stupid hands can end up beating pocket Aces depending upon how the hand plays out--but you'd still rather have pocket Aces than any other hand.

We don't know if McCaffrey will end the 2020 season as the #1 RB again, but even with the high workload, the changes in QB and coaching, the statistical principle of regression to the mean, and everything else considered, McCaffrey still has the BEST chance of being #1, even if the odds are against him repeating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AxeElf said:

It's kind of like pocket Aces in Texas Hold 'Em.  They only win about 60% of the time, and lots of really stupid hands can end up beating pocket Aces depending upon how the hand plays out--but you'd still rather have pocket Aces than any other hand.

We don't know if McCaffrey will end the 2020 season as the #1 RB again, but even with the high workload, the changes in QB and coaching, the statistical principle of regression to the mean, and everything else considered, McCaffrey still has the BEST chance of being #1, even if the odds are against him repeating.

Too many variables to make that Apples-to-Apples comparison. I have also been a big believer of the similarities between Fantasy Football and No-Limit Texas Hold Em. Comparing CMC to any hand doesn't really work. There is League settings to consider (Non-PPR vs half vs Full PPR). Injuries, New QB and Head Coach, Offensive Line. We can say Pocket Aces wins x % of the time (60?), because it can be proven statistically. There is no way to prove either way what % chance CMC has of being the #1 RB. Doesn't work...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, jrokh said:

Too many variables to make that Apples-to-Apples comparison. I have also been a big believer of the similarities between Fantasy Football and No-Limit Texas Hold Em. Comparing CMC to any hand doesn't really work. There is League settings to consider (Non-PPR vs half vs Full PPR). Injuries, New QB and Head Coach, Offensive Line. We can say Pocket Aces wins x % of the time (60?), because it can be proven statistically. There is no way to prove either way what % chance CMC has of being the #1 RB. Doesn't work...

The relevant metaphor is not the percentage of success; the point is that one option can be the best option even when there is a chance that it is not, in fact, the winning option--and sometimes even when the odds are AGAINST it being the winning option.

The 60% win rate for pocket Aces is only when they are heads up against any other hand; if there are five or six players in a hand, the pocket Aces' overall chances of winning the hand may be only 35% to 40%--but given your choice of all the pocket cards in the hand, you still want the Aces.

Among all NFL RBs, McCaffrey's chance of being the top RB may be only 10% to 15%--but his chances are probly better than anyone else's chances, so you still want McCaffrey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

The relevant metaphor is not the percentage of success; the point is that one option can be the best option even when there is a chance that it is not, in fact, the winning option--and sometimes even when the odds are AGAINST it being the winning option.

The 60% win rate for pocket Aces is only when they are heads up against any other hand; if there are five or six players in a hand, the pocket Aces' overall chances of winning the hand may be only 35% to 40%--but given your choice of all the pocket cards in the hand, you still want the Aces.

Among all NFL RBs, McCaffrey's chance of being the top RB may be only 10% to 15%--but his chances are probly better than anyone else's chances, so you still want McCaffrey.

In Non PPR is it better than anyone else? It's way too early to answer that, but I think the question will be interesting. In full PPR, though I agree with your premise...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, jrokh said:

In Non PPR is it better than anyone else? It's way too early to answer that, but I think the question will be interesting. In full PPR, though I agree with your premise...

I'd say yes, for non-PPR.  McCaffrey was 4th in rush attempts last year, and only 16 behind the leader (Derrick Henry), so it's not like he's dependent on the reception count.  Also, even in non-PPR league, you still get credit for the receiving yards.  McCaffrey had 600 more total yards than the next closest RB.  If McCaffrey has a 25% reduction in performance, he'd still have more total yards than any other RB.  If McCaffrey had a 15% reduction and Elliott (who was #2 RB in total yards), had a 15% improvement, Elliott would only beat McCaffrey out by 10 yards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, TBayXXXVII said:

I'd say yes, for non-PPR.  McCaffrey was 4th in rush attempts last year, and only 16 behind the leader (Derrick Henry), so it's not like he's dependent on the reception count.  Also, even in non-PPR league, you still get credit for the receiving yards.  McCaffrey had 600 more total yards than the next closest RB.  If McCaffrey has a 25% reduction in performance, he'd still have more total yards than any other RB.  If McCaffrey had a 15% reduction and Elliott (who was #2 RB in total yards), had a 15% improvement, Elliott would only beat McCaffrey out by 10 yards.

Still think its too early to definitively conclude that. Panthers have a new QB and new head coach, and the latter comes from the college ranks. How many times have we seen this before in fantasy, where the variables change, and the production changes. Then in hindsight you get a lot of 'we should of seen that coming' statements. There are a lot of examples where the variables don't change and the previous # 1 fantasy RB doesn't finish at the top the following year. For example in .5ppr in this past decade (2011-2019), only once did the #1 RB finish at the top the next season (Todd Gurley, 2017-2018). The point Axe was making is CMC is the most likely to finish # 1, but the data doesn't support that, and the historical precedent points to it being unlikely. Still I'm not opining that he shouldn't be the # 1 pick in non ppr, I do however, posit, that it isn't a no doubt slam dunk...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jrokh said:

The point Axe was making is CMC is the most likely to finish # 1, but the data doesn't support that, and the historical precedent points to it being unlikely. Still I'm not opining that he shouldn't be the # 1 pick in non ppr, I do however, posit, that it isn't a no doubt slam dunk...

You still don't seem to be grasping the distinction between being the MOST likely to finish #1 (which the data does support), and being LIKELY to finish #1 (which the data does not support).

Let's say you have 100 players--100 outcomes--and each outcome is assigned a probability from 0.5 to 1.5 (yes, I know that's really 101 outcomes, but it doesn't matter)...

Outcome 1 - 0.51%

Outcome 2 - 0.52%

Outcome 3 - 0.53%

.

.

.

Outcome 99 - 1.49%

Outcome 100 - 1.50%

Now, if you ran 100 trials, there wouldn't be much reason to think that any given outcome is going to show up more than once or twice--NONE of the outcomes are "likely."

However, the outcome with a 1.50% chance of occurring is still the MOST likely to occur.

It may not be likely for CMac to repeat as the #1 RB--in fact, it's likely that he will not--but he is probly still the MOST likely to be the #1 RB in 2020.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

It may not be likely for CMac to repeat as the #1 RB--in fact, it's likely that he will not--but he is probly still the MOST likely to be the #1 RB in 2020.

Based on what exactly? Popular Perception? CMC will very likely be the 1st RB off the board in most drafts, I have little doubt about that. What I am questioning is what data exactly can you point to other than some arbitrary % you are attaching to him being the MOST likely. Again, your initial comparison to pocket Aces does not hold water. We KNOW Pocket Aces against any other hand in no limit hold em, pre-flop will have an x% advantage (I think you said 60, but not important right now), because a computer simulation can spit out the probabilities of say 100,000 hands to compute the actual % of times the Aces won the hand. Fantasy Football doesn't work that way. You keep saying he is the most likely to be # 1, but you can't provide any data to back it up, because such data doesn't exist. In normal conditions I might even agree that CMC is the most likely, even though that wouldn't be based on anything other than my perception of common sense. However, these are not normal times. The panthers have a new head coach, who has never coached in the NFL, and there is no off-season program, other than "virtual", whatever that even means. Who knows if their will be a full training camp, or much of one at all. Their is also a new QB. The game plan could be different, less check downs, and Rhule is already on record saying he wants to lighten CMC's load. All those variables make me hesitate to crown CMC as the no doubt # 1 player in fantasy, simply because he was great last year. In Full PPR, I can get behind it more because the data is more supportive that he will lead all RB's in receptions, but even then I can't quantify that he should be the best, I can only make an educated guess towards that end...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, jrokh said:

Based on what exactly?

Past performance, which is the single best predictor of future performance that we have.

48 minutes ago, jrokh said:

You keep saying he is the most likely to be # 1, but you can't provide any data to back it up, because such data doesn't exist. 

Nonsense.  It does exist, and I can and I will provide it for you, although I would have thought it was pretty obvious to any but the most naive of fantasy players.

Data that backs up the claim of Christian McCaffrey being the #1 RB in 2020:

Christian McCaffrey was the #1 RB in 2019, by almost 80 fantasy points in standard scoring and by over 155 fantasy points in PPR.

3rd place was 11 points behind 2nd place in standard, and 3 points behind 2nd place in PPR.

Happy now?

53 minutes ago, jrokh said:

We KNOW Pocket Aces against any other hand in no limit hold em, pre-flop will have an x% advantage (I think you said 60, but not important right now), because a computer simulation can spit out the probabilities of say 100,000 hands to compute the actual % of times the Aces won the hand. Fantasy Football doesn't work that way. 

I don't know why you keep getting hung up on trying to determine the exact probability of McCaffrey being the #1 RB.  It really doesn't matter.  It could be 90% or it could be 5%--so long as it is a greater probability than that of any other RB, the McCaffrey still has the best chance of being the #1 RB in 2020, and should therefore be drafted first overall--even if the odds are against him being the #1 RB overall.  We can never determine the exact percentages because we can't run 100 trials; we can only determine relative values.  I have included percentages in my examples so that they will be less obtuse than if I started muddying the waters with statistical expressions of probability instead--but the numbers themselves are not important, and I am not arguing for any particular percentage or probability--only that McCaffrey's is higher than everyone else's.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, AxeElf said:

Past performance, which is the single best predictor of future performance that we have.

Nonsense.  It does exist, and I can and I will provide it for you, although I would have thought it was pretty obvious to any but the most naive of fantasy players.

Data that backs up the claim of Christian McCaffrey being the #1 RB in 2020:

Christian McCaffrey was the #1 RB in 2019, by almost 80 fantasy points in standard scoring and by over 155 fantasy points in PPR.

3rd place was 11 points behind 2nd place in standard, and 3 points behind 2nd place in PPR.

Happy now?

I don't know why you keep getting hung up on trying to determine the exact probability of McCaffrey being the #1 RB.  It really doesn't matter.  It could be 90% or it could be 5%--so long as it is a greater probability than that of any other RB, the McCaffrey still has the best chance of being the #1 RB in 2020, and should therefore be drafted first overall--even if the odds are against him being the #1 RB overall.  We can never determine the exact percentages because we can't run 100 trials; we can only determine relative values.  I have included percentages in my examples so that they will be less obtuse than if I started muddying the waters with statistical expressions of probability instead--but the numbers themselves are not important, and I am not arguing for any particular percentage or probability--only that McCaffrey's is higher than everyone else's.

 

The only data you provided was that he was the best in 2019. Which not only doesn't prove anything towards your claim that he is the MOST likely to be # 1 this year, the data from the past decade shows that he is unlikely to be # 1 in 2020. So again, on what basis other than last year's finish can you provide that CMC is MORE likely to finish # 1 in NON-PPR than say Barkley, Zeke or Henry? Don't tell me I already did, he was better last year. Even if the variables DIDN'T change the previous year's # 1 RARELY finishes in that spot the following year. In other words, your claim that " Past performance, which is the single best predictor of future performance that we have." doesn't apply to the subject of THIS discussion, because the data suggests if not the opposite, the likelihood of finishing # 1 is WORSE for the previous years' winner. However the variables are not the same. New Coach, New System, New QB. What you are doing is dancing around what you're not saying. That CMC could only be viewed as the MOST likely to finish # 1 in NON-PPR in 2020 by subjective measures like Public Perception. You don't have an objective metric to support your claim and you never will, but it's still fun to watch you flail away in the dark....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, jrokh said:

The only data you provided was that he was the best in 2019. Which not only doesn't prove anything towards your claim that he is the MOST likely to be # 1 this year, the data from the past decade shows that he is unlikely to be # 1 in 2020. So again, on what basis other than last year's finish can you provide that CMC is MORE likely to finish # 1 in NON-PPR than say Barkley, Zeke or Henry? Don't tell me I already did, he was better last year. Even if the variables DIDN'T change the previous year's # 1 RARELY finishes in that spot the following year. In other words, your claim that " Past performance, which is the single best predictor of future performance that we have." doesn't apply to the subject of THIS discussion, because the data suggests if not the opposite, the likelihood of finishing # 1 is WORSE for the previous years' winner. However the variables are not the same. New Coach, New System, New QB. What you are doing is dancing around what you're not saying. That CMC could only be viewed as the MOST likely to finish # 1 in NON-PPR in 2020 by subjective measures like Public Perception. You don't have an objective metric to support your claim and you never will, but it's still fun to watch you flail away in the dark....

Ok, I give up.  I keep trying to explain to you why what you are saying is irrelevant, and you keep saying it again, as if it were relevant.

I can only conclude that this is above your pay grade and move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, AxeElf said:

Ok, I give up.  I keep trying to explain to you why what you are saying is irrelevant, and you keep saying it again, as if it were relevant.

I can only conclude that this is above your pay grade and move on.

You explained nothing. You keep trying to pass off your opinion based on a faulty premise and the whims of the masses as an objective truth. Conclude whatever you wish, but in the matter of who is most likely to be the # 1 RB in Non-PPR you have nothing of relevance to offer. I'm not surprised at all that you gave up though, when it comes to fantasy knowledge and ability, I am , way above your pay grade....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Dude is bound to get injured at the rate they are using him.

So would you pass on drafting him then based on your own statement?  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, weepaws said:

So would you pass on drafting him then based on your own statement?  

 

Nope. I may take Michael Thomas over him though. So maybe that is a pass since McCaffrey would prob go first in the draft.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, never mind the 400 touches...

With his Week 13 bye, does CMC's draft stock take a hit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/7/2020 at 8:26 PM, AxeElf said:

Ok, never mind the 400 touches...

With his Week 13 bye, does CMC's draft stock take a hit?

Define taking a hit. Going from 1 to 2 overall? The top 6-7 are all the same. I wouldn't pass on McCaffery in the first 5 picks this year unless it was dynasty. And even then I would have to think about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Utilit99 said:

Define taking a hit. Going from 1 to 2 overall?

That would be a hit, yes.

It would certainly give me some pause when considering my #1 overall pick, especially if I was playing in one of those large tournament leagues where playoffs start Week 13--do you really want to be squaring off in an elimination match against one of the top 3 teams in your league with your best player guaranteed to be on the bench?

If your playoffs don't start until Week 14 or later, then it's not as big of a consideration--but you better not need to win that last regular season game to make the playoffs...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have him third on my rb list, I’ll keep him at third with this news.  

Thanks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, AxeElf said:

That would be a hit, yes.

It would certainly give me some pause when considering my #1 overall pick, especially if I was playing in one of those large tournament leagues where playoffs start Week 13--do you really want to be squaring off in an elimination match against one of the top 3 teams in your league with your best player guaranteed to be on the bench?

If your playoffs don't start until Week 14 or later, then it's not as big of a consideration--but you better not need to win that last regular season game to make the playoffs...

If I know AxeElf, he never needs to win in Week 13. The regular season is a mere coronation for his upcoming title and a bye is already in the bag 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, The Football Guru said:

If I know AxeElf, he never needs to win in Week 13. The regular season is a mere coronation for his upcoming title and a bye is already in the bag 🤣

I did say, "but YOU better not need to win that last regular season game to make the playoffs."

It's not all about Axe Elf, you know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/3/2020 at 1:07 PM, AxeElf said:

It's kind of like pocket Aces in Texas Hold 'Em.  They only win about 60% of the time, and lots of really stupid hands can end up beating pocket Aces depending upon how the hand plays out--but you'd still rather have pocket Aces than any other hand.

We don't know if McCaffrey will end the 2020 season as the #1 RB again, but even with the high workload, the changes in QB and coaching, the statistical principle of regression to the mean, and everything else considered, McCaffrey still has the BEST chance of being #1, even if the odds are against him repeating.

Using poker as an analogy makes no sense.  Let’s say Joe Mixon is pocket 2 and 8 unsuited to CMC’s pocket aces.  Pocket 2/8 could become a full house and win the pot, but more than likely be folded right out of the gate.  That’s the same as saying Mixon would be dropped the day after the draft.  
CMC will likely regress to the value of a 3rd round pick based on all the changes in Carolina and the load he carried last year.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A third round pick, wow I can’t see him being that bad this season.  

I see him as a easy first rounder just not the number one rb , I currently rank him third on my rb board.  

But third round wow.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, JagFan said:

Using poker as an analogy makes no sense.

It does; you just missed the point.

6 hours ago, JagFan said:

CMC will likely regress to the value of a 3rd round pick based on all the changes in Carolina and the load he carried last year.  

So you don't think McCaffrey will be a top 12 PPR RB this season eh?  Interesting take...

It makes me think that trying to explain the poker analogy to you any further would be fruitless, so...  carry on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×