Player Spotlight: Steven Jackson (1 Viewer)

2009 Player Spotlight Series

One of Footballguys best assets is our message board community. The Shark Pool is, in our view, the best place on the internet to discuss, debate and analyze all things fantasy football. In what's become an annual tradition, the Player Spotlight series is a key part of the preseason efforts. As many of you know, we consider the Player Spotlight threads the permanent record for analyzing the fantasy prospects of the player in question. Last year, we published more than 120 offensive spotlights covering the vast majority of expected skill position starters. This year will be no different.

Each week we will post a list of players to be discussed. Those threads will remain open for the entire preseason, and should be a central point to discussion expectations for the player in question. Importantly, analysis done in the first week of posting will be part of the permanent record in two ways. 1) At the end of the week, we will tally the projections into a consensus. 2) We will select a number of pull quotes from forum contributors who make a compelling statement or observation. Both the projections and pull quotes will be part of a published article on the main website.

Thread Topic: Steven Jackson, RB, St. Louis Rams

Player Page Link: Steven Jackson Player Page

Each article will include:

Detailed viewpoint from a Footballguys staff member
Highlighted member commentary from the message board threads
FBG Projections
Consensus Member ProjectionsThe Rules

In order for this thread to provide maximum value, we ask that you follow a few simple guidelines:

Focus commentary on the player in question, and your expectations for said player
Back up your expectations in whatever manner you deem appropriate; avoid posts that simply say "I hate him" or "He's the best"
To be included in the final synopsis and consensus outlook, you MUST provide projections for the playerProjections should include (at a minimum):

For QBs: Passing Yards, Passing TDs, Ints, Rush Yards, Rush TDs
For RBs: Rushes, Rushing Yards, Rush TDs, Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDs
For WRs & TEs: Receptions, Receiving Yards, Receiving TDsNow let's get on with the conversation! We look forward to your contributions and let me offer a personal thanks in anticipation of the great debate and analysis.

Jackson has the tremendous size/speed ratio one looks for in a running back. He can also dish out punishment and get the tough yards. He has a knack for missing some games each year though, and it is tough to have that from your first round pick. If Jackson can stay healthy, and if the ram offense shows some signs of life Jackson could be Top 5. I do not like to predict injuries, so I will give his projections a slight uptick from his four year average and say he has possible upside from my projections.

Rush: 280 - 1200 - 8

Rec: 45 - 360 - 1

Unless you believe people can and should get hit by lightening multiple times, I believe Jackson will finally play 16 games this year, and put up MONSTER numbers. I expect a top 5 finish.

Rush: 315 - 1512 - 14

Rec: 55 - 400 - 2

When he plays he's a beast. Basically you draft him and hope that he stays healthy enough to play all 16 games (like he did in 06) or that he's at least good to go come playoff time.

Steven Jackson is a bull and he also catches passed extremely well. His two drawbacks are folks anticipating injury and the fact that the Rams are terrible. In regard to the first drawback, he has missed two, one, zero, four and four games in his career. The last two seasons being problematic, but not a deal breaker for me. In regard to the second drawback, he finished as RB14 and RB13 (FBG non-ppr) scoring in the two most recent seasons and missed four games in each. His per game scoring has been nothing short of great, even while being on a terrible team.

Things change quickly and the NFC West is not an overpowering division. I expect St. Louis to make progress in 09 as they focus on running their offense through Steven Jackson. He will again catch more passes and be provided the opportunity to operate in space, where even though he has great size, he also operates better than expected.

Steven Jackson 15 gms 300 carries 1260 yards 4.2 ypc 60 receptions 480 yards 6.0 ypc and 12 total TDs

800 yards 4 TDs rushing 300 yards receiving 1 TD

NorrisB said:

800 yards 4 TDs rushing 300 yards receiving 1 TD

Click to expand...

Since Jackson began starting for the Rams in 2005 he has never rushed for less than 1,000 yards even last 2 years year when he was hurt. How many games do you think he will miss?

Jackson has become the poster boy of injured RB's

900 yards, 5 tds, 250 rec 1 td

buyer beware

Spags will run and run A LOT!!!!

14 Games:

325 att

1,239 yds

/////////

63 Rec

546 yds

////////

19 total TDs (Rec/Rush)

310/1425/12 65/520/3

Jackson seemingly has become defined by the games he misses as opposed to the ones he plays. As such, there are those who won't touch him and those who'll cross their fingers gor a full 16 games season.

To me, the Jackson Dilemma comes down to one thing. When he is on the field, how does he produce? And in this respect, Jackson has no peer.

During the last 3 years, Jackson has averaged 125.7 YFS/game along with .75 TD's/game. If you subtract the games he was either being worked back into the line-up gradually or clearly should not have been playing, that YFS # rises to 130.6.

I will admit, his injuries are troublesome insofar as they are soft tissue injuries. I've always been able to rationalize breaks and separations as a consequence of playing a rough game. But soft tissue injuries like pulls and tears somehow have a way of creeping to far into a players medical dossier. Almost as if they are prone to being a multiple offender. Jackson has had a groin injury and a quad injury the last two seasons. So there is a significant degree of risk I will admit.

But on these boards last year, I remember a piece of advice I read that essentially stated that "don't worry about injuries if you've got good depth because you'll have time/leeway to make line-up decisions". Even game day line-up decisions are much easier nowadays with the advent of internet enabled mobile devices (BB, iPhone, etc...). If we consider ourselves to be sharks, then we should easily be able to snare a worthy RB3 and most sharks feel that they can snatch a great RB4 thus protecting themselves against Jackson going down for a period of 2-4 weeks. Remember, Jackson is only 26 and he's been able to put up incredibly impressive stats on teams that went 13-35 the last 3 seasons (including 5-27 the last 2 years). Couple that with the fact that the Rams WR's are extremely unproven and Marc Bulger hasn't looked like a viable NFL QB since 2006 (or since he signed his mega-deal) and you know that whatever offense St. Louis is able to muster will go through Jackson.

For me, I think he'll last at least 14 games and will predict to that pace. But I am not fearful of Jackson at all and would consider him with a Top 3 pick based on his upside.

Prediction: 299 Carries 1273 Rushing Yards 9 TD's; 47 Receptions 413 Receiving Yards 2 TD's

As has been pointed out, the knock on Steven Jackson is that he has missed games two seasons in a row.

Here is an excerpt from a Doug Drinen study, as quoted by Mark Wimer in THIS thread:

The results for running backs are eye-opening. Running backs that play a full slate of 16 games in one year have about a 50% chance to repeat that feat the next year (the most recent data set came in at 49%; the first study from 1988-1998 came in at 47.6%) - if they do not play in 16 games, they should, statistically speaking, manage about 14 (13.6 ('95-'06) and 13.7 ('88-'98)). Guys who missed a game here and there the previous year (played in 13-15 games) have a roughly 40% chance of playing a full slate of games the next year (41% in the '95-'06 data set; 40.1% in the '88-'98 study), and average about 13 games in the subsequent campaign (12.9 and 13.1, according to the 2 studies, respectively). In other words, even the sturdiest NFL running backs are likely to miss 2-3 games in any given NFL season, even if they have previously not been injured or only suffered minor injuries in the past.

Click to expand...

~~ full disclosure: the study also says that RBs that play 8-12 games one season average 10.2 games played the next season... and Jackson has played 12 games in each of the last two seasons ~~I have a couple of minor quibbles with the data: First, it includes players that averaged at least 8 fantasy ppg and played at least 8 games, which may be too broad, at least as it pertains to top 20 RBs. Too many part time RBs will be included in the data, imo, and may skew the results, assuming part timers are less likely than full timers to be injured.

Second, and this mostly pertains to the Steven Jackson discussion, the use of 8-12 games played is broad as well. Is a player that plays 12 games more like a player that plays 13 games or more like a player that plays 8 games? It would be more useful to break the data down by each different amount of games played rather than sort of arbitrarily using 8-12 and 13-16 games played. What would change if it were 8-11 games and 12-16 games instead? How about several dividing points, 8-9, 10-11, 12-13, etc.?

I am a HUGE Drinen fan, so this is not a criticism, just a minor quibble.

That being said, it seems quite illuminating that over 1/2 of the RBs that played 16 games (and averaged 8+ ppg) missed an average of almost 3 games the next season. This tells me one significant thing: ALL RBs ARE SIGNIFICANT INJURY RISKS.

And to throw some anecdotal evidence onto the RB injury fire: 16 out of the preseason top 30 RBs in 2008 missed games due to injury. Of the 14 RBs that did not miss any games, 5 of them did not carry a full load. So that leaves 9 consensus top 30 full timers that did not miss time in 2008. Two of them were 1st year starters, Turner and Forte. (though Turner had missed time as LT's backup) Of the remaining 7 full timers that did not miss time in 2008, 6 of them had previously missed 2 or more games as a starter; the list follows:

Player ...... seasons missing 2+ games/total starter seasons

Portis: 2/6

Peterson: 1/2

L.Johnson: 2/4

J.Lewis: 2/8

T.Jones: 3/8

R.Brown: 2/3

That is a total of 12 seasons missing 2+ games out of 31 starter seasons....

So... what does it mean to be an injury prone RB? In 4 starter seasons, Jackson has played 15, 16, 12, and 12 games, roughly in line with Doug's data. I postulate that we cannot usefully predict a RB's injuries from one year to the next if there is not a lingering or degenerative condition.

~~~

Back to Steven Jackson. The Rams were horrid on offense last year. The main cause was their terrible offensive line play, which was due in no small part to starter games missed. Overall, the Rams were in the bottom tier of total starter games missed.... one cannot predict injuries, but regression to the mean would indicate a return to the league average. The Rams are losing Orlando Pace, who played well last year, but not nearly as well as when he was in his prime. They drafted Jason Smith to replace him. They also signed Jason Brown from Baltimore, who is a significant upgrade. Incognito is a capable young guard with upside, and Jacob Bell is a capable guard as well. Alex Barron is a capable RT who is in a contract year.

This unit will be, at worst, as good as last year, and really should be better.

The Rams still look like a bad offensive team, but Jackson put up TOP 3 fantasy numbers in the games he played last year. TOP. THREE.

Throw in the fact that the Rams have a pretty solid looking schedule, and I am optimistic that Jackson can have another very good season.

Projections:

310 carries, 1300 yards

65 catches, 500 yards

10 total TDs

<Edited for clarity>

NorrisB said:

800 yards 4 TDs rushing 300 yards receiving 1 TD

Click to expand...

Is this shtick or do you think he will miss games?This is one of the spotlight threads I'm most interested in.

Gopher State said:

Jackson has become the poster boy of injured RB's900 yards, 5 tds, 250 rec 1 tdbuyer beware

Click to expand...

Did you read the post above yours? How many games do you think he will miss?

Bottom line....

No matter how the team is performing Jackson gets the ball and puts up fantasy points. If he plays a full schedule he will be a top 3 PPR back

290 / 1290

52 / 433

13 Total TDs

It's a wonder that Jackson produced as well as he did last year behind the Rams' decimated offensive line. That is likely his floor, but the new management has put their money where their collective mouths are with numerous offseason additions that should ensure an improved running game. Center Jason Brown and tackle Jason Smith help revitalize the offensive line, and Mike Karney gives Jackson a sorely-needed lead blocker.

After the past two tumultuous offseasons, Jackson's active participation in the team's revamped strength and conditioning program from day one this time around is also a very welcome positive sign. Regardless of whether this will translate into a healthier Steven Jackson, it should at least help him avoid a slow start.

305 carries - 1295 rushing yards - 11 TDs

50 catches - 430 receiving yards - 2 TDs

It had been pointed out a number of years ago that a player that misses training camp seemed to run a higher risk of injury. Looking at last year that continued, e.g. Steven Jackson and Ryan Grant (I think I am forgetting someone else). I believe Steven Jackson will stay healthy and reclaim his spot as the focal point of the Rams offense.

300-1290-9 65-585-2

Marshall Faulk has issues with him + he's sheet the bed the last two yrs when he's been top 5 "projected" + the Rams D will still suck = 1300 all purpose and 9 TD's (4 TD's coming in one game)

PASS

Jackson is in a weird spot historically, as not many RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons and gone on to have a lot of success the following year. Part of that stems from there being only a limited number of RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons. Guys that have not played in at least 4 games in consecutive seasons and ranked in the Top 10 the following year: Ricky Williams, Larry Johnson, and Greg Bell. (I couldn't find others but I wouldn't say I considered everyone.) I'm not sure if those missed games were coaches decisions or games missed due to injury.

From what I could tell, only a few guys have missed 4 games in a season two years in a row and then ranked in the Top 10 at some point in their careers. I identified Ottis Anderson, Earnest Byner, Garrison Hearst, Robert Smith, and Kevin Mack as players that met that criteria.

That probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson this year but I found it interesting none the less.

rzrback77 said:

Steven Jackson is a bull and he also catches passed extremely well. His two drawbacks are folks anticipating injury and the fact that the Rams are terrible. In regard to the first drawback, he has missed two, one, zero, four and four games in his career. The last two seasons being problematic, but not a deal breaker for me. In regard to the second drawback, he finished as RB14 and RB13 (FBG non-ppr) scoring in the two most recent seasons and missed four games in each. His per game scoring has been nothing short of great, even while being on a terrible team.

Things change quickly and the NFC West is not an overpowering division. I expect St. Louis to make progress in 09 as they focus on running their offense through Steven Jackson. He will again catch more passes and be provided the opportunity to operate in space, where even though he has great size, he also operates better than expected.

Steven Jackson 15 gms 300 carries 1260 yards 4.2 ypc 60 receptions 480 yards 6.0 ypc and 12 total TDs

Click to expand...

so, you're saying missing 11 games in 5 years, 8 over the past two seasons , is OK? yes, I'm expecting another S. Jackson injury, it is all he has given us to go by.he IS injury prone..I'm sure you have guys you own't touch because of the injury-prone tag,right? well, S Jackson is my 'do not touch' player..

you're expecting 15 games from a guy who only once has played a full 16-game schedule.

you're expecting 1260 yards from a guy who only once rushed for more than 1046 yards in a season..

you're expecting 12 total TDs from a guy who's never scored more than 10 combined TDs in any season other than 2006.

including 2006, his lifetime rush td avg is just 7.4..

you're expecting 60 recs from a guy who has only once caught more than 43 balls in a single season,who's lifetime avg, including his gaudy 2006 stats, ( 90 catches) is just 46 recs/yr.

260/1066/6/33rec

good for about RB #17-20-ish..

yep, he'll miss a few games this season. it's a lock, like the sun rising in the east..

just my 2 cents, but Steven Jackson is perhaps the most overrated player in fantasy football

Rams' offense was tied-30th in total pts, tied-30th in ppg, tied-30th in TD's..

defense: gave up 5th most total yards per game in NFL...2nd in pts allowed ( 29.1 per game), trailing only detroit.thats right they gave up more pts than anyone not named Detroit.

Tanner9919 said:

rzrback77 said:

Steven Jackson is a bull and he also catches passed extremely well. His two drawbacks are folks anticipating injury and the fact that the Rams are terrible. In regard to the first drawback, he has missed two, one, zero, four and four games in his career. The last two seasons being problematic, but not a deal breaker for me. In regard to the second drawback, he finished as RB14 and RB13 (FBG non-ppr) scoring in the two most recent seasons and missed four games in each. His per game scoring has been nothing short of great, even while being on a terrible team.

Things change quickly and the NFC West is not an overpowering division. I expect St. Louis to make progress in 09 as they focus on running their offense through Steven Jackson. He will again catch more passes and be provided the opportunity to operate in space, where even though he has great size, he also operates better than expected.

Steven Jackson 15 gms 300 carries 1260 yards 4.2 ypc 60 receptions 480 yards 6.0 ypc and 12 total TDs

Click to expand...

so, you're saying missing 11 games in 5 years, 8 over the past two seasons , is OK? yes, I'm expecting another S. Jackson injury, it is all he has given us to go by.he IS injury prone..I'm sure you have guys you own't touch because of the injury-prone tag,right? well, S Jackson is my 'do not touch' player..

you're expecting 15 games from a guy who only once has played a full 16-game schedule.

you're expecting 1260 yards from a guy who only once rushed for more than 1046 yards in a season..

you're expecting 12 total TDs from a guy who's never scored more than 10 combined TDs in any season other than 2006.

including 2006, his lifetime rush td avg is just 7.4..

you're expecting 60 recs from a guy who has only once caught more than 43 balls in a single season,who's lifetime avg, including his gaudy 2006 stats, ( 90 catches) is just 46 recs/yr.

260/1066/6/33rec

good for about RB #17-20-ish..

yep, he'll miss a few games this season. it's a lock, like the sun rising in the east..

just my 2 cents, but Steven Jackson is perhaps the most overrated player in fantasy football

Rams' offense was tied-30th in total pts, tied-30th in ppg, tied-30th in TD's..

defense: gave up 5th most total yards per game in NFL...2nd in pts allowed ( 29.1 per game), trailing only detroit.thats right they gave up more pts than anyone not named Detroit.

Click to expand...

Another Steven Jackson post where Tanner will not respond to my post. Which RBs will not get hurt this year? On average, over 50% of the players that played 16 games the year before do so again.... the over 50% that miss games miss an average of almost 3 games. Read my post above to gain some much needed perspective.

Jackson has missed 9 games in 4 years as the starter, 2.25 games per year average.

Lott said:

Which RBs will not get hurt this year? On average, over 50% of the players that played 16 games the year before do so again.... the over 50% that miss games miss an average of almost 3 games. Read my post above to gain some much needed perspective.Jackson has missed 9 games in 4 years as the starter, 2.25 games per year average.

Click to expand...

Here's my theoretical question. PLAYER X gets hurt and misses an entire season but then plays in all 16 games for 4 years in a row after that. Games played percentage = 80%.PLAYER Y over that same time misses 1,2,4,2, and 6 games over those 5 seasons. His games played percentage = 82%.Which player would be considered more of an injury risk? PLAYER X, PLAYER Y, or they're both the same?

David Yudkin said:

Jackson is in a weird spot historically, as not many RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons and gone on to have a lot of success the following year. Part of that stems from there being only a limited number of RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons. Guys that have not played in at least 4 games in consecutive seasons and ranked in the Top 10 the following year: Ricky Williams, Larry Johnson, and Greg Bell. (I couldn't find others but I wouldn't say I considered everyone.) I'm not sure if those missed games were coaches decisions or games missed due to injury.From what I could tell, only a few guys have missed 4 games in a season two years in a row and then ranked in the Top 10 at some point in their careers. I identified Ottis Anderson, Earnest Byner, Garrison Hearst, Robert Smith, and Kevin Mack as players that met that criteria.That probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson this year but I found it interesting none the less.

Click to expand...

How about RBs that have missed 3 games in back to back season? Is that substantively different? If Jackson had played in one more game in 2007, would the criteria change?One easy example of a RB that missed multiple games and came back to have success: Fred Taylor. He missed 6, 3, and 14 games in successive seasons. But he doesn't qualify for the 4 games missed in back-to-back seasons.I'm not criticizing, and you specifically said this probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson, but it just feels like you took a very specific stat, 4 games missed in back to back seasons, and looked for specific examples of that. I'm not sure that is useful, and not much different than 3 games, or 3 games one year and 8+ games the next, etc..

People are expecting Steven Jackson to repeat his 2006 season. The truth is, that season may have been the flash in the pan, the exception not the norm, etc. He certainly has talent, but the Rams were certainly different in 2006 than in 2009. His going price is going to be much more than I'm willing to pay.

David Yudkin said:

Lott said:

Which RBs will not get hurt this year? On average, over 50% of the players that played 16 games the year before do so again.... the over 50% that miss games miss an average of almost 3 games. Read my post above to gain some much needed perspective.Jackson has missed 9 games in 4 years as the starter, 2.25 games per year average.

Click to expand...

Here's my theoretical question. PLAYER X gets hurt and misses an entire season but then plays in all 16 games for 4 years in a row after that. Games played percentage = 80%.PLAYER Y over that same time misses 1,2,4,2, and 6 games over those 5 seasons. His games played percentage = 82%.Which player would be considered more of an injury risk? PLAYER X, PLAYER Y, or they're both the same?

Click to expand...

I understand your point, and I don't disagree with it. All things considered, I would rate Jackson as having slightly more chance of injury than some other RBs.My main problem with the "injury prone" label is how it applies to RBs.... very few RBs play 16 games over and over. So, how much does one downgrade a player that has a theoretical 60%+ chance of getting hurt over a player that, historically speaking across a large sample size, has a 50%+ chance of getting hurt?

a_troll00 said:

People are expecting Steven Jackson to repeat his 2006 season. The truth is, that season may have been the flash in the pan, the exception not the norm, etc. He certainly has talent, but the Rams were certainly different in 2006 than in 2009. His going price is going to be much more than I'm willing to pay.

Click to expand...

Either that or they are expecting him to be around the same production as last year.... which is top 3 when he was on the field.

Lott said:

David Yudkin said:

Jackson is in a weird spot historically, as not many RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons and gone on to have a lot of success the following year. Part of that stems from there being only a limited number of RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons. Guys that have not played in at least 4 games in consecutive seasons and ranked in the Top 10 the following year: Ricky Williams, Larry Johnson, and Greg Bell. (I couldn't find others but I wouldn't say I considered everyone.) I'm not sure if those missed games were coaches decisions or games missed due to injury.From what I could tell, only a few guys have missed 4 games in a season two years in a row and then ranked in the Top 10 at some point in their careers. I identified Ottis Anderson, Earnest Byner, Garrison Hearst, Robert Smith, and Kevin Mack as players that met that criteria.That probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson this year but I found it interesting none the less.

Click to expand...

How about RBs that have missed 3 games in back to back season? Is that substantively different? If Jackson had played in one more game in 2007, would the criteria change?One easy example of a RB that missed multiple games and came back to have success: Fred Taylor. He missed 6, 3, and 14 games in successive seasons. But he doesn't qualify for the 4 games missed in back-to-back seasons.I'm not criticizing, and you specifically said this probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson, but it just feels like you took a very specific stat, 4 games missed in back to back seasons, and looked for specific examples of that. I'm not sure that is useful, and not much different than 3 games, or 3 games one year and 8+ games the next, etc..

Click to expand...

No matter how you set up the # of missed games, Taylor is in a minority of backs that suffered numerous injuries but then came back and did very well. Most of the time, a team will move on and other teams may eventually consider picking him up (but with a label of damaged goods). But there are not many backs that have suffered severe enough injuries to miss a month of the season or more on multiple occasions and then come back and been a consistent producer.

Lott said:

David Yudkin said:

Lott said:

Which RBs will not get hurt this year? On average, over 50% of the players that played 16 games the year before do so again.... the over 50% that miss games miss an average of almost 3 games. Read my post above to gain some much needed perspective.Jackson has missed 9 games in 4 years as the starter, 2.25 games per year average.

Click to expand...

Here's my theoretical question. PLAYER X gets hurt and misses an entire season but then plays in all 16 games for 4 years in a row after that. Games played percentage = 80%.PLAYER Y over that same time misses 1,2,4,2, and 6 games over those 5 seasons. His games played percentage = 82%.Which player would be considered more of an injury risk? PLAYER X, PLAYER Y, or they're both the same?

Click to expand...

I understand your point, and I don't disagree with it. All things considered, I would rate Jackson as having slightly more chance of injury than some other RBs.My main problem with the "injury prone" label is how it applies to RBs.... very few RBs play 16 games over and over. So, how much does one downgrade a player that has a theoretical 60%+ chance of getting hurt over a player that, historically speaking across a large sample size, has a 50%+ chance of getting hurt?

Click to expand...

I have been saying for several years now that the guys that are healthy are the ones that will finish in the top 10 and guys that are not healthy are the ones that will fall out of the top 10. It actually took me quite a bit of research over the years to figure out that it basically boils down to that. People of course will say, "Well duh, ya genius." Opportunity and talent obviously makes the difference beyond that, but if a guy isn't playing he isn't producing.So the question on Jackson is whether he is more of an injury risk than anyone else. I don't know enough about his injuries over the years to have an opinion if they are anything chronic, serious, or otherwise fluke instances. For example, Faulk and TDavis had degenerative or chronic knee injuries. Those obviously weren't going to go away. I don't recall seeing Jackson tabbed with anything career threatening, but I can't say that I've kept on top of his health regularly either.As I argued in other threads, it's not like your fantasy team gets a zero should Jackson not play, and 12 weeks of Jackson and 4 weeks of SUBSTITUTE RB would still get you Top 10 RB production from that spot. So IMO, Jackson is probably worth what it will take to draft him provided people don't personally see him as an undue injury risk. I myself don't like his chances of getting many TD, and that to me would be a bigger issue to me than his health.Another consideration is when Jackson might be out, as not having him for the fantasy playoffs would be a lot more disconcerting as a fantasy owner . . .

David Yudkin said:

Lott said:

David Yudkin said:

Jackson is in a weird spot historically, as not many RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons and gone on to have a lot of success the following year. Part of that stems from there being only a limited number of RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons. Guys that have not played in at least 4 games in consecutive seasons and ranked in the Top 10 the following year: Ricky Williams, Larry Johnson, and Greg Bell. (I couldn't find others but I wouldn't say I considered everyone.) I'm not sure if those missed games were coaches decisions or games missed due to injury.From what I could tell, only a few guys have missed 4 games in a season two years in a row and then ranked in the Top 10 at some point in their careers. I identified Ottis Anderson, Earnest Byner, Garrison Hearst, Robert Smith, and Kevin Mack as players that met that criteria.That probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson this year but I found it interesting none the less.

Click to expand...

How about RBs that have missed 3 games in back to back season? Is that substantively different? If Jackson had played in one more game in 2007, would the criteria change?One easy example of a RB that missed multiple games and came back to have success: Fred Taylor. He missed 6, 3, and 14 games in successive seasons. But he doesn't qualify for the 4 games missed in back-to-back seasons.I'm not criticizing, and you specifically said this probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson, but it just feels like you took a very specific stat, 4 games missed in back to back seasons, and looked for specific examples of that. I'm not sure that is useful, and not much different than 3 games, or 3 games one year and 8+ games the next, etc..

Click to expand...

No matter how you set up the # of missed games, Taylor is in a minority of backs that suffered numerous injuries but then came back and did very well. Most of the time, a team will move on and other teams may eventually consider picking him up (but with a label of damaged goods). But there are not many backs that have suffered severe enough injuries to miss a month of the season or more on multiple occasions and then come back and been a consistent producer.

Click to expand...

Ricky Williams did it. Missed 4 games, then 6 games. Then had 3 straight years of 16 games being very productive.

Snotbubbles said:

David Yudkin said:

Lott said:

David Yudkin said:

Jackson is in a weird spot historically, as not many RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons and gone on to have a lot of success the following year. Part of that stems from there being only a limited number of RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons. Guys that have not played in at least 4 games in consecutive seasons and ranked in the Top 10 the following year: Ricky Williams, Larry Johnson, and Greg Bell. (I couldn't find others but I wouldn't say I considered everyone.) I'm not sure if those missed games were coaches decisions or games missed due to injury.From what I could tell, only a few guys have missed 4 games in a season two years in a row and then ranked in the Top 10 at some point in their careers. I identified Ottis Anderson, Earnest Byner, Garrison Hearst, Robert Smith, and Kevin Mack as players that met that criteria.That probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson this year but I found it interesting none the less.

Click to expand...

How about RBs that have missed 3 games in back to back season? Is that substantively different? If Jackson had played in one more game in 2007, would the criteria change?One easy example of a RB that missed multiple games and came back to have success: Fred Taylor. He missed 6, 3, and 14 games in successive seasons. But he doesn't qualify for the 4 games missed in back-to-back seasons.I'm not criticizing, and you specifically said this probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson, but it just feels like you took a very specific stat, 4 games missed in back to back seasons, and looked for specific examples of that. I'm not sure that is useful, and not much different than 3 games, or 3 games one year and 8+ games the next, etc..

Click to expand...

No matter how you set up the # of missed games, Taylor is in a minority of backs that suffered numerous injuries but then came back and did very well. Most of the time, a team will move on and other teams may eventually consider picking him up (but with a label of damaged goods). But there are not many backs that have suffered severe enough injuries to miss a month of the season or more on multiple occasions and then come back and been a consistent producer.

Click to expand...

Ricky Williams did it. Missed 4 games, then 6 games. Then had 3 straight years of 16 games being very productive.

Click to expand...

I know he did . . . that's why I listed him in my initial post.

David Yudkin said:

Lott said:

Which RBs will not get hurt this year? On average, over 50% of the players that played 16 games the year before do so again.... the over 50% that miss games miss an average of almost 3 games. Read my post above to gain some much needed perspective.Jackson has missed 9 games in 4 years as the starter, 2.25 games per year average.

Click to expand...

Here's my theoretical question. PLAYER X gets hurt and misses an entire season but then plays in all 16 games for 4 years in a row after that. Games played percentage = 80%.PLAYER Y over that same time misses 1,2,4,2, and 6 games over those 5 seasons. His games played percentage = 82%.Which player would be considered more of an injury risk? PLAYER X, PLAYER Y, or they're both the same?

Click to expand...

I know you were using the 16 games four years straight just to illustrate a point, but for fun I looked at the top 36 RBs from 2008 and tried to find the ones who had played 16 games 4 years straight. The resultsunn - surprisingly resilientLT - iron manZERO other players in the top 36 had 4 straight seasons of 16 games. Of those who have not played in 4 or more seasons, they all missed time in at leasy one season except for:J.Stewart 1/1Hightower 1/1Washington 3/3 mostly a part timerL.McClain 2/2 (17 touches in yr1)K.Smith 1/1S.Slaton 1/1M.Forte 1/1So 5 rookies have started their careers off with a 16 game season... how many will keep that up?RBs that might not qualify:M.Moore - not a starterR.Grant 1/2 - probably missed his only game due to being inactive when he first joined Green BayC.Johnson 0/1 - don't recall if he missed week 17 due to injury or being held out because Tenn had clinched.I eyeballed the next 50 Rbs and didn't see anybody that jumped out. Edge came close. Pittman came close. Rudi Johnson had 3 straight.Pretty long odds of a RB staying healthy for a meaningful amount of time.A number of guys missed games one year, played 16 a year or 2, then missed games, then played 16. That is the normal pattern.

Lott said:

David Yudkin said:

Lott said:

Which RBs will not get hurt this year? On average, over 50% of the players that played 16 games the year before do so again.... the over 50% that miss games miss an average of almost 3 games. Read my post above to gain some much needed perspective.Jackson has missed 9 games in 4 years as the starter, 2.25 games per year average.

Click to expand...

Here's my theoretical question. PLAYER X gets hurt and misses an entire season but then plays in all 16 games for 4 years in a row after that. Games played percentage = 80%.PLAYER Y over that same time misses 1,2,4,2, and 6 games over those 5 seasons. His games played percentage = 82%.Which player would be considered more of an injury risk? PLAYER X, PLAYER Y, or they're both the same?

Click to expand...

I know you were using the 16 games four years straight just to illustrate a point, but for fun I looked at the top 36 RBs from 2008 and tried to find the ones who had played 16 games 4 years straight. The resultsunn - surprisingly resilientLT - iron manZERO other players in the top 36 had 4 straight seasons of 16 games. Of those who have not played in 4 or more seasons, they all missed time in at leasy one season except for:J.Stewart 1/1Hightower 1/1Washington 3/3 mostly a part timerL.McClain 2/2 (17 touches in yr1)K.Smith 1/1S.Slaton 1/1M.Forte 1/1So 5 rookies have started their careers off with a 16 game season... how many will keep that up?RBs that might not qualify:M.Moore - not a starterR.Grant 1/2 - probably missed his only game due to being inactive when he first joined Green BayC.Johnson 0/1 - don't recall if he missed week 17 due to injury or being held out because Tenn had clinched.I eyeballed the next 50 Rbs and didn't see anybody that jumped out. Edge came close. Pittman came close. Rudi Johnson had 3 straight.Pretty long odds of a RB staying healthy for a meaningful amount of time.A number of guys missed games one year, played 16 a year or 2, then missed games, then played 16. That is the normal pattern.

Click to expand...

Last I checked, the average missed time for RBs was 2-3 games a year (but that includes guys that miss longer stretches). Given that the number of uber backs has been decreasing and the number of mid tier backs has been increasing, I generally no longer kill myslef to get a stable of 300+ touch backs anymore.I have survived on getting some leftovers and puzzle pieces much later like Mewelde Moore, Sammy Morris, Derrick Ward, Kevin Faulk, etc. for cheap and using them when I had to, thus beefing up at other positions early in the draft. (I have generally had late in the round draft position, so that also forced me into this approach more than I would have wanted.)As I mentioned earlier, 12 games of Steven Jackson won't kill you (unless it's the wrong 4 weeks he misses). If he missed 8-10 weeks, well that's another story. But you could say that about any first round pick.

"I'm really working on being a complete running back," Jackson said after minicamp practice Thursday. "I have said that in the past, but this year I am able to really work out with the receivers and make sure I'm a good route-runner. It's different than catching 4- and 5-yard checkdowns. I'm flanking out wide with the receivers and learning to run routes."

http://myespn.go.com/blogs/nfcwest/0-9-199...ng-numbers.html

Last year's St Louis Rams team was one of the worst situations for the RB position imaginable. The offensive line was pulling guys off the practice squad to fill holes, the passing game moved the ball backwards more often than forwards, the team never got into the redzone, and the defense was so bad that the team typically had to abandon the run by halftime.

Last year, Jackson had fewer redzone rushing attempts than THREE PLAYERS on the New England Patriots team alone. He had fewer rushing attempts than backups and brief injury fill-in guys like Mewelde Moore.

Yet still, in spite of all that, he finished top 5 in PPG among RBs. Still, in spite of all of that, he was on pace to finish with over 2000 yards and double digit TDs.

Steven Jackson's floor when he plays is higher than anyone I've ever seen before in fantasy football. In the last decade, no offense has been a worse situation for production out of the RB position than the last two years of St Louis Rams football. Yet still, he was top 5 ppg in that situation.

In a worst case scenario, if the Rams were playing high school players at every position, Jackson would still be top 10 ppg. If the Rams become even MEDIOCRE, or even just BAD instead of dreadful, we've seen what Jackson can do (2006). Things change fast, and often for no visible reason in the NFL from one season to the next, so this is not unlikely. People talk about regression to the mean with players all the time, but why only with players? No team has maintained being as dreadful a fantasy situation as StL has the last two years for any long period of time.

The only concern with Jackson is the injuries, as has been noted. So I'll project him at 14 games played, which is his career average.

14 games played

305-1350 rushing (4.3ypc) with 11 TDs

55-510 receiving (9.2 ypc) with 2 TDs

Off topic...but saw him at Wrigley last Saturday. He's a friggin monster in a normal surroundings.

David Yudkin said:

Jackson is in a weird spot historically, as not many RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons and gone on to have a lot of success the following year. Part of that stems from there being only a limited number of RBs have missed 4 games in back-to-back seasons. Guys that have not played in at least 4 games in consecutive seasons and ranked in the Top 10 the following year: Ricky Williams, Larry Johnson, and Greg Bell. (I couldn't find others but I wouldn't say I considered everyone.) I'm not sure if those missed games were coaches decisions or games missed due to injury.From what I could tell, only a few guys have missed 4 games in a season two years in a row and then ranked in the Top 10 at some point in their careers. I identified Ottis Anderson, Earnest Byner, Garrison Hearst, Robert Smith, and Kevin Mack as players that met that criteria.That probably doesn't have a lot of bearing on Jackson this year but I found it interesting none the less.

Click to expand...

I think the three closest historical comps to Steven Jackson's situation are George Rogers, Fred Taylor and Freeman McNeil. All three were top 5 backs at age 23 or younger and were top draft picks, and then followed the top 5 season with two straight injury riddled seasons (where they played in at least half the games but missed at least 3). Rogers was top 5 as a rookie in 1981 then played in 6 of 9 in 1982 and missed 3 more in 1983, so he played in 19 of 25, similar to Jackson. Taylor missed 9 total in 1999-2000 after finishing top 5 as a rookie. McNeil was top 5 in his second season in 1982 and led the league in rush yards, then missed 7 games in 1983 and 4 more in 1984.Williams is similar except he didnt have the top 5 first, as his injury seasons were the first two. If you relax the top 5 requirement, then John Riggins also had two straight seasons of 3+ missed games at a young age.

I know Jackson is viewed as injury prone. I also think he could benefit from a more moderate workload, and then, magically, like Fred Taylor before him, could shed the injury prone label. Coaches see his physical stature and think he can carry the ball continuously--maybe there's just something about Jackson that just can't. I think history shows that bulk alone doesn't guarantee you can carry the ball alot without getting hurt. Does that mean he's injury prone. I don't think so. I think a player is injury prone if they continually get hurt despite the amount of work they get, where the injuries are random.

The good news, I guess, is this:

1) he hasn't suffered a really serious injury yet that would alter his abilities long term; and

2) his injuries have directly followed games where he had a higher workload, and when he has had a more moderate rushing workload over a stretch of games, has stayed healthy.

Let's look at his game logs. I pulled his entire career, and divided it into groups based on rushing attempt workload. Moderate workload is rushes of 23 or less in a game, Intermediate workload is 24-27, and High workload is 28+. I defined the period a game was classified into based on the game, and if a high or intermediate game, the 50 touches that occurred after. Thus, if Jackson had 32 carries in a game, then that game and the next few would count as a high workload period, until he got past 50 touches. All periods could be ended by injury. A high workload period is ended only by getting to 50 additional touches past the last high game. An intermediate period is ended by either 1) getting to 50 additional touches past the last intermediate game, or 2) having a high workload game.

Since there was a discussion about injuries per touch and how these injury rates must be due to simply getting more touches, and the risk of each touch, I'll break it down that way.

Here are the results:

moderate starter workload (23 or fewer carries each game): 38 games, 706 touches, 1 game missed (week 17, 2005)

intermediate starter workload (24 to 27 carries, +50 additional touches): 25 games, 576 touches, 6 games missed (weeks 14-15, 2004, weeks 8, 10-12, 2008)

high starter workload (28+ carries, +50 additional touches): 6 games, 174 touches*, 4 games missed (weeks 4-8, 2007)

*doesn't include the 32 and 30 carry games to close out 2008 since the period hasn't ended yet.

Great discussion in this thread. I am pursuing a trade for S-Jax, so I wanted to bump this to see if there are any additional thoughts.

I hadn't put much thought into SJ, as I've rarely owned him in years past. Now I find myself kind of biased towards thinking he's in for a big year in 2009, most likely since he may be joining my roster.

People are expecting Steven Jackson to repeat his 2006 season. The truth is, that season may have been the flash in the pan, the exception not the norm, etc. He certainly has talent, but the Rams were certainly different in 2006 than in 2009. His going price is going to be much more than I'm willing to pay.

Click to expand...

If I expected S Jax to repeat his best season I would have him number 1 on my board. Though number 3 that year he would have been number 1 last year with those numbers by 40 pts. If there is truly a decline in the bell cow back those numbers could easily win you a championship.

Given that the number of uber backs has been decreasing and the number of mid tier backs has been increasing, I generally no longer kill myslef to get a stable of 300+ touch backs anymore.

Click to expand...

On the one hand this makes sense- there are more opportunities to round out your roster and fill RB#2 and still be competitive since so many other players will be doing the same. On the other hand if 300 carry backs are becoming rarer then they are becoming more valuable. The ability to get 2 300+ touch backs would be more likely to win your league than before.

rzrback77 said:

Steven Jackson is a bull and he also catches passed extremely well. His two drawbacks are folks anticipating injury and the fact that the Rams are terrible. In regard to the first drawback, he has missed two, one, zero, four and four games in his career. The last two seasons being problematic, but not a deal breaker for me. In regard to the second drawback, he finished as RB14 and RB13 (FBG non-ppr) scoring in the two most recent seasons and missed four games in each. His per game scoring has been nothing short of great, even while being on a terrible team.

Things change quickly and the NFC West is not an overpowering division. I expect St. Louis to make progress in 09 as they focus on running their offense through Steven Jackson. He will again catch more passes and be provided the opportunity to operate in space, where even though he has great size, he also operates better than expected.

Steven Jackson 15 gms 300 carries 1260 yards 4.2 ypc 60 receptions 480 yards 6.0 ypc and 12 total TDs

Click to expand...

Yah I think the NFC West is an important/underrated factor. Like Wells in AZ for the same reason.

TheWick said:

Bottom line....No matter how the team is performing Jackson gets the ball and puts up fantasy points. If he plays a full schedule he will be a top 3 PPR back290 / 129052 / 43313 Total TDs

Click to expand...

You better hope so or I'll be mopping the floor with you in every league. I'm actually surprised you didn't say 2500/30.

Jackson averaged 20.5 fantasy ppg (0 PPR) in 2006. In three other seasons as a starter, he's averaged 14.2 fantasy ppg. The main difference is that he has gotten into the end zone a lot less (a trend which probably will continue this year).

Over a 16-game season, that total (14.2) would normally rank S-Jax in the Top 6-10 backs. People will have to assess his injury risk individually, but he should be considered a Top 5-10 back on a PPG basis.

Multiple Scores said:

TheWick said:

Bottom line....No matter how the team is performing Jackson gets the ball and puts up fantasy points. If he plays a full schedule he will be a top 3 PPR back290 / 129052 / 43313 Total TDs

Click to expand...

You better hope so or I'll be mopping the floor with you in every league. I'm actually surprised you didn't say 2500/30.

Click to expand...

Steven Jackson is very capable of 1700+ total yards and 13 TDs.

Grahamburn said:

Multiple Scores said:

TheWick said:

Bottom line....No matter how the team is performing Jackson gets the ball and puts up fantasy points. If he plays a full schedule he will be a top 3 PPR back290 / 129052 / 43313 Total TDs

Click to expand...

You better hope so or I'll be mopping the floor with you in every league. I'm actually surprised you didn't say 2500/30.

Click to expand...

Steven Jackson is very capable of 1700+ total yards and 13 TDs.

Click to expand...

No question if he plays in 14 or more games he has a chance to put up these type numbers........

Darker Knight said:

Grahamburn said:

Multiple Scores said:

TheWick said:

Bottom line....No matter how the team is performing Jackson gets the ball and puts up fantasy points. If he plays a full schedule he will be a top 3 PPR back290 / 129052 / 43313 Total TDs

Click to expand...

You better hope so or I'll be mopping the floor with you in every league. I'm actually surprised you didn't say 2500/30.

Click to expand...

Steven Jackson is very capable of 1700+ total yards and 13 TDs.

Click to expand...

No question if he plays in 14 or more games he has a chance to put up these type numbers........

Click to expand...

I would say better than just a "chance" of it. The last three seasons prorating Jackson's numbers out if he had played all 16 games would look like:2008: 2036 total yards and 12 TDs2007: 1733 total yards and 8 TDs2006: 2334 total yards and 16 TDsAnd those were in some of the worst situations imaginable, so it's hard to imagine those numbers going anywhere but up on a per game basis.The question is really just whether or not he'll actually end up playing 14+ games.

Grahamburn said:

Multiple Scores said:

TheWick said:

Bottom line....No matter how the team is performing Jackson gets the ball and puts up fantasy points. If he plays a full schedule he will be a top 3 PPR back290 / 129052 / 43313 Total TDs

Click to expand...

You better hope so or I'll be mopping the floor with you in every league. I'm actually surprised you didn't say 2500/30.

Click to expand...

Steven Jackson is very capable of 1700+ total yards and 13 TDs.

Click to expand...

He's just attacking my SJax man-love. I wear my Jackson probowl jersey every sunday

TheWick said:

Grahamburn said:

Multiple Scores said:

TheWick said:

Bottom line....No matter how the team is performing Jackson gets the ball and puts up fantasy points. If he plays a full schedule he will be a top 3 PPR back290 / 129052 / 43313 Total TDs

Click to expand...

You better hope so or I'll be mopping the floor with you in every league. I'm actually surprised you didn't say 2500/30.

Click to expand...

Steven Jackson is very capable of 1700+ total yards and 13 TDs.

Click to expand...

He's just attacking my SJax man-love. I wear my Jackson probowl jersey every sunday

Click to expand...

Is that Rebecca Linares? Hot.

If he plays 16 games this season, I think:

349 - 1500, 70 for 490, 17 total TD's

a real shot at RB1 this year.

footballnerd said:

TheWick said:

Grahamburn said:

Multiple Scores said:

TheWick said:

Bottom line....No matter how the team is performing Jackson gets the ball and puts up fantasy points. If he plays a full schedule he will be a top 3 PPR back290 / 129052 / 43313 Total TDs

Click to expand...

You better hope so or I'll be mopping the floor with you in every league. I'm actually surprised you didn't say 2500/30.

Click to expand...

Steven Jackson is very capable of 1700+ total yards and 13 TDs.

Click to expand...

He's just attacking my SJax man-love. I wear my Jackson probowl jersey every sunday

Click to expand...

Is that Rebecca Linares? Hot.

Click to expand...

two_dollars said:

If he plays 16 games this season, I think:

349 - 1500, 70 for 490, 17 total TD's

a real shot at RB1 this year.

Click to expand...

Wow, quite a change of heart since your comments in the other Steven Jackson thread link... like this gem:

Aug 2 2009, 04:09 PM

Post #141

I already followed up on your numbers.. ti all depends on the scoring system. I won't touch him because I think he has no heart. I think he'd rather claim a sore hammy than tough it out for a team that is going nowhere.

Click to expand...

Welcome to the Jackson supporter side.