RB Rankings for PPR (with projections) - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

RB Rankings for PPR (with projections)

Moderator: Football Moderators

Re: RB Rankings for PPR (with projections)

Postby steelerfan513 » Fri Aug 03, 2007 5:37 pm

Basically everything that I believe should have been said has been said except for one thing:

I don't see Westbrook's numbers seeing that drastic of a drop. He had over 1200 rushing yards last year on only 240 carries, and he had almost 80 receptions. If anything, I would think Andy Reid would try to use him more this year based on his performance last year. He won't be a 25-30 carry guy for sure, but I think he will get 18-20 carries on a more consistent basis. Unless you're predicting an injury, Westbrook's numbers will definitely not see that much of a drop.

JMO
Image
Image
Kudos to Leber for the amazing sig and to Metroid for the userbar and making them both fit
2008 and 2009 Defunct Dynasty League Champion
steelerfan513
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Cafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeMatchup Meltdown Survivor
Posts: 11906
Joined: 15 Sep 2005
Home Cafe: Football

Re: RB Rankings for PPR (with projections)

Postby biju » Fri Aug 03, 2007 6:13 pm

steelerfan513 wrote:Basically everything that I believe should have been said has been said except for one thing:

I don't see Westbrook's numbers seeing that drastic of a drop. He had over 1200 rushing yards last year on only 240 carries, and he had almost 80 receptions. If anything, I would think Andy Reid would try to use him more this year based on his performance last year. He won't be a 25-30 carry guy for sure, but I think he will get 18-20 carries on a more consistent basis. Unless you're predicting an injury, Westbrook's numbers will definitely not see that much of a drop.

JMO


Yeah, I know I'm having problems with that myself.

The truth is that I stuck with the same "concept" throughout the entire process, which means that Westbrook's numbers expect that he'll miss two games. It also takes into account seasons previous to just last year. While Westbrook was exceptional in PPR leagues last year, he was just good prior to 2006. His rushing numbers have never been as high as they were last year so there *could* be a valid argument that he will regress to the mean more than keep his current pace up.

I'll be honest with you and say that while I don't necessarily like the application here, it worked in nearly every other application of these projections so I had to keep it as is.

Thanks for the input! ;-D
Image
biju
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 5941
Joined: 6 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Seattle - Ballard

Re: RB Rankings for PPR (with projections)

Postby eaglesrule » Fri Aug 03, 2007 6:33 pm

in 2003, Westbrook had to split carries with Staley and Buckhalter, and they all were in the same ballpark of touches. If he got the 240 or so that a feature back would get, he would be around 1000.

Then, Westbrook wasn't even the full-time back until 2004, so I don't know what "mean" he is regressing to, to be honest. He missed three games or would have probably broken 1000 yards as he was already a 800, and two of those games were because Reid sat them players. 2005 was a washout, who knows what he would have done. Even if healthy, probably not well because mike mcmahon was trash. But he was hurt, and there isn't spin on that really.

Then he has a monster year last year. He also has never had a per carry average of less than 4, and we know how explosive he is. I think the only knock on him to be honest is injury, and that's legit to a degree. But he isn't going to be taken out of games because of score because he is a 70 catch threat. Figure that his worst season as a starter garnered 945 total yards and 11 tds, and after that 1,200 yards or more of total offense has been his norm, even through injury.

Anyway, not much point in arguing, I just think perception of him is off. If even in an injury shortened year you can garner enough points to qulaify as a nice RB#2, you must be pretty good.
The opening scene of the movie "Saving Private Ryan" is loosely based on games of dodgeball Brian Dawkins played in second grade.
eaglesrule
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2843
Joined: 3 Dec 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Re: RB Rankings for PPR (with projections)

Postby mattb47 » Fri Aug 03, 2007 7:15 pm

biju wrote:
mattb47 wrote:Second. If you're expecting Portis to retain most of the carries then predicting him to end up with just 1290 yards is far too low a prediction in my opinion. That is a very productive offense and should he receive a good chunk of the carries he should end up getting at least in the 1400 yard range and I think that should this happen he's also got an excellent shot at getting double digit rushing TDs (considering he had 7 in just 6 starts last year).


Well, I should have worded "most of the carries" a little different. Many people at the Cafe are predicting a 50/50 split. I don't believe, if he's healthy, that split will be correct. I'm more along the line of 65/35, but realistically even at that you're not really giving only those guys 100% of the carries. WAS has, the last two years, averaged out giving their RB3 just over 6% of the total carries. This number was inflated last year due to Portis' injury, so let's just call it 5%. The carries come down to right around 500 per year (more this year as I suspect Jason Campbell will run some) which means that 475 carries will be split across Betts and Portis. 65% of 475 is roughly 309 carries. Multiply that by Clinton's YPC, which I attributed as 4.2 (2004: 3.8, 2005: 4.3, 2006: 4.1) and you get (475 * 0.65 * 4.2) 1296.75 yards. TDs are a different subject, but if you average out the TDs you'll get around 14 TDs per year rushing. Multiply that by 65% and you get 9.1.


Well, I think your predicted ypc is the problem here. Here's how I look at it. The Washington offense progressively got better as the year went on as far as running the ball is concerned and I think this is mainly due to the fact that they were running a new system under new OC Al Saunders and things finally started to click part of the way through the year. I think if you're going to be estimating a ypc this year, you should be looking at one closer to what Betts had last season than what Portis had done in Washington in the past as this next year's system is by far the best one they've had since he has arrived in Washington. I think we could certainly see 4.6-4.8 ypc which would put his yardage in the 1421 (4.6) to 1483 (4.8) yard range if we take your estimate of 309 carries. Now I personally see Portis getting closer to 70% of the carries which would be about 325 carries or so and so I don't see him getting 1450-1500 yards or more being that out of reach at all really.

And the TDs thing you did was ridiculous. Most RBs don't get more than 70-75% of the carries at the very most for their teams so assuming that he just gets 65% of the TDs because he's getting 65% of the carries is exceptionally flawed.

DeAngelo Williams is going to be an interesting player to watch this year. I'm not high on him at all, and everyone can gladly come back and say I told you so at the end of the year if I'm wrong. But for me, I think it's going to be too easy for teams to double team Steve Smith and then wait for the rush.


I think you're just ignoring a bit too much some of the offensive changes being made there that really play much more to Williams' strengths than Foster's considering it is the very offense he was so productive in while in college and they are also planning on using a lot of screen passes and dump offs which will likely mean some sizable reception numbers. You don't have to agree with me that he'll be over 1000 yards this year (which I think he will) but 615 yards is very very low I think. I mean he'll surpass those numbers if he only gets 150 carries at 4.2 ypc and I think he'll certainly be seeing the ball more than that.

Hmmm. That's a good point. I was countering the fact that I believe the Steelers are in for a tough year offensively (and defensively for that matter) but that shouldn't mean that Parker's passing numbers will decrease. As a matter of fact, I think I remember that Ben tends to throw more short passes that most QBs do. I'll have to review those numbers and figure out why I had him that low.


I would ask why exactly you think the Steelers would be in for a tougher year offensively (and even defensively) in comparison to last year? They had an absolutely horrid year on both sides of the ball last year by their normal standards and the offense was ridiculously predictable which is why they had so much trouble much of the time. Much of the focus in bringing in more of a spread type look to the offense on early downs is to take out some of the predictability and that can only bode well for this offense. Opening up more lanes for the speedy Parker to work and having more receiving options for Big Ben to work with in the passing game will help the offense be more efficient overall. Before it had been run on first and second and then try to pass on 3rd if needed. This year there will be the threat to run or pass on any down which (at least in my opinion) is a great change for any offense.

Jacobs just isn't going to last the full year IMO. Maybe I'm doing the wrong thing by assuming he's going to get injured, but then I'd also have to adjust Westbrook's numbers as well as those numbers don't reflect a full year from him either.


I think you're going to have a hard time having extremely accurate rankings if you factor in possible injuries as much as you're doing with Jacobs. He may not last the whole year but 1000 yards for a full time starting RB isn't exactly a difficult prospect in today's NFL. There were 22 RBs last year who eclipsed the 1000 yard mark and 2 more who had over 900 yards. I think you'd be predicting that Jacobs miss a large portion of this season for him to come up that short yardage wise and I don't think you can count on even some of the more injury prone players to miss more than a few games when making your projections.
Image
mattb47
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyeCafe MusketeerCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 14238
Joined: 29 Nov 2004
Home Cafe: Football

Re: RB Rankings for PPR (with projections)

Postby biju » Fri Aug 03, 2007 9:39 pm

mattb47 wrote:
biju wrote:
mattb47 wrote:Second. If you're expecting Portis to retain most of the carries then predicting him to end up with just 1290 yards is far too low a prediction in my opinion. That is a very productive offense and should he receive a good chunk of the carries he should end up getting at least in the 1400 yard range and I think that should this happen he's also got an excellent shot at getting double digit rushing TDs (considering he had 7 in just 6 starts last year).


Well, I should have worded "most of the carries" a little different. Many people at the Cafe are predicting a 50/50 split. I don't believe, if he's healthy, that split will be correct. I'm more along the line of 65/35, but realistically even at that you're not really giving only those guys 100% of the carries. WAS has, the last two years, averaged out giving their RB3 just over 6% of the total carries. This number was inflated last year due to Portis' injury, so let's just call it 5%. The carries come down to right around 500 per year (more this year as I suspect Jason Campbell will run some) which means that 475 carries will be split across Betts and Portis. 65% of 475 is roughly 309 carries. Multiply that by Clinton's YPC, which I attributed as 4.2 (2004: 3.8, 2005: 4.3, 2006: 4.1) and you get (475 * 0.65 * 4.2) 1296.75 yards. TDs are a different subject, but if you average out the TDs you'll get around 14 TDs per year rushing. Multiply that by 65% and you get 9.1.


Well, I think your predicted ypc is the problem here. Here's how I look at it. The Washington offense progressively got better as the year went on as far as running the ball is concerned and I think this is mainly due to the fact that they were running a new system under new OC Al Saunders and things finally started to click part of the way through the year. I think if you're going to be estimating a ypc this year, you should be looking at one closer to what Betts had last season than what Portis had done in Washington in the past as this next year's system is by far the best one they've had since he has arrived in Washington. I think we could certainly see 4.6-4.8 ypc which would put his yardage in the 1421 (4.6) to 1483 (4.8) yard range if we take your estimate of 309 carries. Now I personally see Portis getting closer to 70% of the carries which would be about 325 carries or so and so I don't see him getting 1450-1500 yards or more being that out of reach at all really.

And the TDs thing you did was ridiculous. Most RBs don't get more than 70-75% of the carries at the very most for their teams so assuming that he just gets 65% of the TDs because he's getting 65% of the carries is exceptionally flawed.


Ok. Let's be realistic here regarding the "new" system and how effective it is. Let's start with something we can probably both agree on: Ladell Betts has the ability to play at an RB1 level. I think that's fair to say at the very least. Next--and this is the part we'll likely disagree on--a fresh RB1 is going to do some damage against tired defenses (see McGahee and the Bills in 2004, plus the next 2 seasons). This is my entire basis of why Sanders system suddenly seemed to "work" and also my reasoning that Betts might not necessarily be able to beat Portis outright for the starting spot. If he *could* do that, there's no reason for Washington to give them an even split; just keep both fresh and stomp your way into the postseason. For that matter, if they really thought the system is what made Betts good, why not trade off both players and strengthen up other areas of the team. It could very well be that I'm underestimating the YPC, but using fresh legs to prove a point is flawed reasoning IMO.

As for the TDs, I think we can also agree that TDs are pretty much a crapshoot to a degree. And you're right that true #1s tend to get the majority of goal line touches, but again I think this is where mere playset splits will dictate the TDs instead of the situation (much like when LJ was backing up Holmes' 2005 season in a 1/3 - 2/3 split). Again, it could be flawed but Portis wouldn't be a "true" RB1 even if he was completely healthy as I don't believe he'd be put in on goalline situations if it were Betts' set of downs.

mattb47 wrote:
DeAngelo Williams is going to be an interesting player to watch this year. I'm not high on him at all, and everyone can gladly come back and say I told you so at the end of the year if I'm wrong. But for me, I think it's going to be too easy for teams to double team Steve Smith and then wait for the rush.


I think you're just ignoring a bit too much some of the offensive changes being made there that really play much more to Williams' strengths than Foster's considering it is the very offense he was so productive in while in college and they are also planning on using a lot of screen passes and dump offs which will likely mean some sizable reception numbers. You don't have to agree with me that he'll be over 1000 yards this year (which I think he will) but 615 yards is very very low I think. I mean he'll surpass those numbers if he only gets 150 carries at 4.2 ypc and I think he'll certainly be seeing the ball more than that.


Well again, this is where we differ the most. The Carolina situation did not get better. They might be changing their offensive approach but I'm not sold, nor should anyone at this point, that it's going to make a difference. I think it's too risky to base higher numbers on information of this nature.

Furthermore, the presence of Williams is exactly the reason why Foster has remained healthy. I think 4.1 YPC should be expected this year as well and, as you assumed, I'm expecting 150 carries. It could go up another 30 or so, but to expect 1,000 rushing out of him is too optimistic. That would take 200 carries at 5 YPC (not realistic) or 239 at 4.2. That's a lot of carries for an RB who isn't considered the starting RB.

mattb47 wrote:
Hmmm. That's a good point. I was countering the fact that I believe the Steelers are in for a tough year offensively (and defensively for that matter) but that shouldn't mean that Parker's passing numbers will decrease. As a matter of fact, I think I remember that Ben tends to throw more short passes that most QBs do. I'll have to review those numbers and figure out why I had him that low.


I would ask why exactly you think the Steelers would be in for a tougher year offensively (and even defensively) in comparison to last year? They had an absolutely horrid year on both sides of the ball last year by their normal standards and the offense was ridiculously predictable which is why they had so much trouble much of the time. Much of the focus in bringing in more of a spread type look to the offense on early downs is to take out some of the predictability and that can only bode well for this offense. Opening up more lanes for the speedy Parker to work and having more receiving options for Big Ben to work with in the passing game will help the offense be more efficient overall. Before it had been run on first and second and then try to pass on 3rd if needed. This year there will be the threat to run or pass on any down which (at least in my opinion) is a great change for any offense.


This retort from me isn't meant to be a good argument: I will never have love for the Steelers, nor will I think that a Steeler fan will ever think their team will have a bad year. :-D

That said, losing Cowher and Whisenhunt will never be a good thing for this team. I still think Roethlisberger is a mediocre QB and Pittsburgs' defense hasn't gotten better, which was part of the problem last year. Having said that, I see more passing and less running which does bode well for the idea of Parker getting more catches, but I think they'll need to push it downfield more than dumpoffs as they'll play catchup in half their games.

mattb47 wrote:
Jacobs just isn't going to last the full year IMO. Maybe I'm doing the wrong thing by assuming he's going to get injured, but then I'd also have to adjust Westbrook's numbers as well as those numbers don't reflect a full year from him either.


I think you're going to have a hard time having extremely accurate rankings if you factor in possible injuries as much as you're doing with Jacobs. He may not last the whole year but 1000 yards for a full time starting RB isn't exactly a difficult prospect in today's NFL. There were 22 RBs last year who eclipsed the 1000 yard mark and 2 more who had over 900 yards. I think you'd be predicting that Jacobs miss a large portion of this season for him to come up that short yardage wise and I don't think you can count on even some of the more injury prone players to miss more than a few games when making your projections.


Actually, factoring in injuries is a big part of the game IMO. Why take the unnecessary risk of an oft-injured player with a high pick? It's better to rank them lower and take the more consistent player. Furthermore, because this is his first season as the featured back I think the Giants help lower his load using Droughns. Last, but not least, the Giants are going to be a terrible team this year. They will be coming from behind in the 4th quarter often so that limits your RBs to only 3 or so real quarters of work at best. That is not something to be dismissed lightly.
Image
biju
Hall of Fame Hero
Hall of Fame Hero

User avatar
Fantasy ExpertCafe WriterCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterSweet 16 Survivor
Posts: 5941
Joined: 6 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Seattle - Ballard

Previous

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 8:08 hours
(and 38 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact