A different look at Ryan Grant (1 Viewer)

[Chase Stuart]

I wanted to cook up a similarity score for Ryan Grant, similar to what Doug Drinen's done before and what JKL did here. I think Grant's a guy I don't have a really good feel on; he's only started 7 games in his career, he was undrafted, yet he was incredible last season and he looks like a good RB. I don't really trust my eyes, though, so I wanted to know if history could guide us. To that extent, what have players like Ryan Grant 2007 done the following year?

Well, what's a player like Ryan Grant? There are seven noteworthy things about Ryan Grant's 2007 season.

-- He was in his first season as a starter

-- He was 25 years old

-- He was undrafted

-- He had 188 carries

-- He averaged 5.1 YPC

-- He rushed for 8 TDs

-- He caught 30 passes

If I could find other players who fit a similar profile, that -- if nothing else -- would be interesting. So I created a similarity score, where every RB starts at 1000 and then gets the following points subtracted:

1) For every season starting away from the #1, - 50 points. If this was their 5th season starting, that's -200. If they weren't the starter in the year in question, and had never started a season before, they'd get -50 (0 seasons starting to that point.

2) For every age unit away from 25, - 50 points. A 30 year old RB would get -250; a 23 year old RB gets -100.

3) This one's a bit complicated. I'm just going to say I created a logarithmic curve of NFL production vis-a-vis draft pick to give a better fit to the exponential value of your draft slot. Basically, undrafted players get a 3, the first pick gets a 73, the 91st pick in the draft a 16, the 23rd pick in the draft a 33. More info can be found on this here, but suffice it to say, I think it's very good. Grant, as an undrafted player, gets a 3. For every point above a 3, you get -2 points. So LT (#5 pick, value of 53) would be -100. This might not be a large enough variable (i.e., maybe -3 points or -4 points would be better), but IMO, draft value is a lot less important after you get a season in. Anyway, I might move this up, but the results don't produce a lot of highly drafted players, so I'm okay with it.

4) For every carry off of 188, -1 point.

5) For every yard off 5.09 YPC, -40 points. (So 4.59 YPC would be -20 points.) I think this might not be high enough, so I'm open to ideas here.

6) For every rushing TD off of 8, -10 points.

7) For every reception off of 30, -2 point.

So, I did that for every RB since the merger, and since 1992. I think the since '92 list is better, so I'm going with that. Here are the top 30 comparables:

year st age drval rsh ypc rtd rec Sim 2007 1 25 3.0 188 5.09 8 30 1000 Ryan Grant2007 1 25 14.0 202 5.00 4 23 906 Brandon Jacobs 1993 1 24 5.7 195 5.14 6 21 898 Gary Brown1998 1 25 3.0 233 4.33 7 43 889 Priest Holmes1999 1 25 11.9 205 3.39 5 29 866 Jonathan Linton1997 1 25 16.4 204 3.79 4 29 863 Bam Morris2001 1 26 3.0 213 4.12 9 23 862 Stacey Mack1994 1 25 5.7 169 3.83 4 18 862 Gary Brown2005 1 25 3.0 255 4.71 4 18 854 Willie Parker1997 0 25 33.7 194 4.33 8 28 848 Antowain Smith2003 1 24 15.2 215 4.45 9 21 845 Rudi Johnson2002 0 24 3.0 188 4.44 6 38 838 Marcel Shipp2004 0 25 10.1 118 4.57 8 25 835 Derrick Blaylock1997 2 25 6.2 151 4.62 4 37 834 Charles Way2005 1 25 28.8 205 4.29 2 34 831 DeShaun Foster2004 0 25 6.1 160 4.46 2 30 831 Chester Taylor1996 2 25 36.1 190 3.81 8 30 831 James Stewart2000 1 25 28.1 213 4.72 8 70 830 Tiki Barber2003 0 24 18.1 201 5.09 6 35 827 Kevan Barlow2004 1 25 18.1 244 3.37 7 35 825 Kevan Barlow2001 1 25 3.0 237 3.21 5 19 824 Maurice Smith1999 1 25 47.0 138 5.20 6 23 823 Tim Biakabutuka2003 1 25 3.0 228 3.64 0 30 822 Marcel Shipp1993 3 25 12.1 177 4.02 8 27 822 Barry Foster2003 1 24 16.4 117 5.24 7 37 822 Brian Westbrook1996 1 25 17.4 141 4.50 3 15 821 LeShon Johnson1996 1 26 10.2 121 4.68 5 31 820 Dorsey Levens2004 1 26 3.0 217 3.78 6 45 819 Nick Goings2007 1 24 3.0 140 5.21 1 35 817 Selvin Young2001 1 25 3.0 113 5.12 2 4 811 Troy Hambrick2006 1 24 13.3 151 4.30 4 25 811 Leon WashingtonI can show the Year N+1 results soon, but I'm curious to see what people think of the formula first. I'd prefer to make my tweaks before seeing the results.***Formula updated in post 18***

 

[BigSteelThrill]

 

[gianmarco]

You amaze me at times, Chase.

 

[Tom Baker]

Gary Brown. Those were the days. I miss him.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

I like it, I think the equations seem to be fair, I thought maybe the -10 for Td's may be a little low, maybe 15 or 20 since Td's are pretty important for RB's.

Also, you have equations/formulas for receptions, rushes, and TD's, why nothing on yardage? How can yardage for a RB comparison not be in a formula?

 

[Chase Stuart]

I like it, I think the equations seem to be fair, I thought maybe the -10 for Td's may be a little low, maybe 15 or 20 since Td's are pretty important for RB's.Also, you have equations/formulas for receptions, rushes, and TD's, why nothing on yardage? How can yardage for a RB comparison not be in a formula?

I've got YPC and Carries, so yards is in there.

 

[bostonfred]

Can't see how you can compare him with people who got the same number of carries in a full season RBBC, when he only played the second half of the season, or had an MVP caliber performance from his QB, or had an injured, higher pick on the team who had a chance to take carries. My biggest knocks on him is that I think that he was forced into action and succeeded because he had fresh legs against teams that had to worry about Favre. Next year he may share carries, he won't have the advantage of fresh legs, and he won't have Favre to keep defenses away from him. I like the idea of finding similar players, but your model doesnt' seem to address that.

 

[The Man With No Name]

Charles Way- I started him at times in '97-'98

 

[David Dodds]

I think the yards per carry needs to be higher (and I am not sure it's really linear either. Maybe the square of the difference type of formula). I also think the receptions difference should be a bit bigger value as well (possibly 4 points for each one off). It seems like the 1st two categories are almost the same so I also wonder if at -50 for each tick in those if you aren't over-counting the difference of say a 26 year old player.

These players seems the most similar to me:

2003 0 24 18.1 201 5.09 6 35 827 Kevan Barlow

1993 1 24 5.7 195 5.14 6 21 898 Gary Brown

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

Look at Marcell Shipp and Selvin Young. Marcell Shipp had zero rushing Td's and Selvin Young had 1. Somehow the TD's aren't weighted heavy enough or the age thing is weighted too much, as those are all about the same.

It would be hard to buy into Marcell Shipp with zero rushing Td's that year should make any list to a guy who had 8 rushing Td's.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Can't see how you can compare him with people who got the same number of carries in a full season RBBC, when he only played the second half of the season, or had an MVP caliber performance from his QB, or had an injured, higher pick on the team who had a chance to take carries. My biggest knocks on him is that I think that he was forced into action and succeeded because he had fresh legs against teams that had to worry about Favre. Next year he may share carries, he won't have the advantage of fresh legs, and he won't have Favre to keep defenses away from him. I like the idea of finding similar players, but your model doesnt' seem to address that.

It wouldn't be difficult to include a variable on the ability of his QB, although i'm not inclined to do so. I think, outside of the open question on the true impact of QB quality on RB performance, it will really lower the sample size if you want to look for RBs who played with great QBs in Year N and essentially rookies in Year N+1. I don't think the payoff is worth it.I'm also not really sure your committee point is valid. I take it you're saying it's easier to amass good rushing stats if you have 0 carries in games 1-8, and 20 carries a game in games 9-16, then if you have 10 carries a game every week. I don't really know if that's true.I understand your fresh legs point, but I do think that's to some extent incorporated into the model. If we're dealing with mostly first time starters with high YPC and a moderate number of touches, we can assume that they played well and garnered more playing time as the year went along, as did Grant. Clearly, it's not perfect.

 

[cstruk]

When I saw what you were doing, the first person I thought of was Gary Brown. Hopefully, Grant does not turn out like that POS.

 

[EBF]

I can't comment too much on the formula because I haven't the foggiest how to go about trying to find comp players to Grant. The main factors that stick out to me about him are:

1. He was undrafted.

2. He did not succeed on his first NFL team.

3. He played very well in his first extended opportunity.

You have to be impressed by what he did with his opportunity, but the sample size of less than 200 carries on a pretty stacked offense isn't enough to definitively prove to me that this guy is legit. I tend to shy away from weak pedigree backs until they prove over an extended period of time that they're for real. His season last year reminded me a lot of Chris Brown's crazy 2004 when he rushed for 1000+ yards at 4.9 YPC and looked like a total stud. Unless I already have reason to believe that a guy is a star in waiting and/or unless he absolutely wows me in the eyeball test, I can't give him the benefit of the doubt on the basis of so few carries.

Your similarity scores seem to bode well for his prospects. Then again, that might say more about your formula than it does about Grant's prospects. I still think the effort is worthwhile and helpful though.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think the yards per carry needs to be higher (and I am not sure it's really linear either. Maybe the square of the difference type of formula). I also think the receptions difference should be a bit bigger value as well (possibly 4 points for each one off). It seems like the 1st two categories are almost the same so I also wonder if at -50 for each tick in those if you aren't over-counting the difference of say a 26 year old player.These players seems the most similar to me:2003 0 24 18.1 201 5.09 6 35 827 Kevan Barlow1993 1 24 5.7 195 5.14 6 21 898 Gary Brown

I think most of those are good points. I disagree about receptions, though. I almost didn't want to include them. I'm not saying this formula is great for all RBs, but Grant's a pretty average RB pass catcher. He's not Reggie Bush and he's not Rudi Johnson. His receiving prowess doesn't really identify Grant as much. I didn't want to zero it, but I think -1 is okay there.

Look at Marcell Shipp and Selvin Young. Marcell Shipp had zero rushing Td's and Selvin Young had 1. Somehow the TD's aren't weighted heavy enough or the age thing is weighted too much, as those are all about the same.It would be hard to buy into Marcell Shipp with zero rushing Td's that year should make any list to a guy who had 8 rushing Td's.

Good points. JKL in his post had rushing TDs at -20, which I thought was too high. I'll put that back in, though.

 

[MaddHatter]

Gary Brown. Those were the days. I miss him.

Running Backs coach at Rutgers now.

 

[bostonfred]

Can't see how you can compare him with people who got the same number of carries in a full season RBBC, when he only played the second half of the season, or had an MVP caliber performance from his QB, or had an injured, higher pick on the team who had a chance to take carries. My biggest knocks on him is that I think that he was forced into action and succeeded because he had fresh legs against teams that had to worry about Favre. Next year he may share carries, he won't have the advantage of fresh legs, and he won't have Favre to keep defenses away from him. I like the idea of finding similar players, but your model doesnt' seem to address that.

It wouldn't be difficult to include a variable on the ability of his QB, although i'm not inclined to do so. I think, outside of the open question on the true impact of QB quality on RB performance, it will really lower the sample size if you want to look for RBs who played with great QBs in Year N and essentially rookies in Year N+1. I don't think the payoff is worth it.I'm also not really sure your committee point is valid. I take it you're saying it's easier to amass good rushing stats if you have 0 carries in games 1-8, and 20 carries a game in games 9-16, then if you have 10 carries a game every week. I don't really know if that's true.I understand your fresh legs point, but I do think that's to some extent incorporated into the model. If we're dealing with mostly first time starters with high YPC and a moderate number of touches, we can assume that they played well and garnered more playing time as the year went along, as did Grant. Clearly, it's not perfect.

I'd like to see comparables work better, but we have such a small sample size that you really can't find a statistically valid group of comparables for most players. I like what you're trying to do, but I think my biggest concerns will still be left out of your dataset.

 

[gianmarco]

I think you somehow need to set some cutoffs that would eliminate certain players once they exceed those limits.

i.e., less than 2 TDs, > 29 years old, < 100 carries, etc.

Would be arbitrary cutoffs, but some of these cutoffs should eliminate some players that don't deserve to be on the list but the differences in the #'s still keep them on there.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Edits:

Took IWBACB's advice and changed RB TD coefficient from 10 to 20.

Took DD's advice and lowered the age variable and year starting variable coefficients from 50 to 30.

Took DD's advice and changed YPC variable from: 40 * difference in YPC to 1.5 * difference in YPC *10 (so as to avoid squaring a number less than one). In practice, this means a RB who averaged 4.6 YPC goes from -20 to -37.5; 4.8 goes from -12 to -13.5; 4.1 goes from -40 to -150.

year	st   age	drval  rsh	ypc	 rtd   rec   Sim	2007	1	25	 3.0	188	5.09	 8	30	1000   Ryan Grant1993	1	24	 5.7	195	5.14	 6	21	899	Gary Brown2007	1	25	14.0	202	5.00	 4	23	869	Brandon Jacobs2003	0	24	18.1	201	5.09	 6	35	847	Kevan Barlow2005	0	24	26.5	173	5.32	 8	18	846	Tatum Bell2007	1	28	 6.1	157	5.38	 7	29	838	Chester Taylor2004	0	25	10.1	118	4.57	 8	25	836	Derrick Blaylock2003	1	24	16.4	117	5.24	 7	37	835	Brian Westbrook2000	1	25	28.1	213	4.72	 8	70	825	Tiki Barber1998	1	25	 3.0	233	4.33	 7	43	823	Priest Holmes2002	0	24	 3.0	188	4.44	 6	38	821	Marcel Shipp2003	1	24	15.2	215	4.45	 9	21	820	Rudi Johnson2007	0	24	14.2	204	4.78	10	44	820	Marion Barber2001	1	22	 3.0	233	4.74	 9	34	819	Dominic Rhodes2004	1	23	16.2	220	4.85	 6	20	813	Chris Brown1997	0	25	33.7	194	4.33	 8	28	813	Antowain Smith2005	1	25	 3.0	255	4.71	 4	18	808	Willie Parker1999	1	25	47.0	138	5.20	 6	23	806	Tim Biakabutuka1995	1	23	 6.8	237	4.71	 7	49	805	Terrell Davis1996	1	26	10.2	121	4.68	 5	31	802	Dorsey Levens1997	2	25	 6.2	151	4.62	 4	37	801	Charles Way2004	0	25	31.7	120	4.84	 9	22	800	Larry Johnson1997	1	23	25.9	233	4.85	10	27	795	Corey Dillon1993	2	24	25.3	208	4.57	10	31	793	Ricky Watters1997	1	22	 3.0	182	4.45	 7	 8	779	Fred Lane1996	1	24	 6.5	232	4.55	 5	49	778	Jamal Anderson1995	0	25	 3.0	107	5.33	 3	28	776	Robert Green2001	1	26	 3.0	213	4.12	 9	23	771	Stacey Mack2007	1	24	 3.0	140	5.21	 1	35	770	Selvin Young2006	0	23	 3.0	157	4.31	 8	20	769	Mike Bell1996	0	26	19.2	153	4.44	 8	 9	769	Lamar Smith

 

[Chase Stuart]

I can't comment too much on the formula because I haven't the foggiest how to go about trying to find comp players to Grant. The main factors that stick out to me about him are:1. He was undrafted.2. He did not succeed on his first NFL team. 3. He played very well in his first extended opportunity. You have to be impressed by what he did with his opportunity, but the sample size of less than 200 carries on a pretty stacked offense isn't enough to definitively prove to me that this guy is legit. I tend to shy away from weak pedigree backs until they prove over an extended period of time that they're for real. His season last year reminded me a lot of Chris Brown's crazy 2004 when he rushed for 1000+ yards at 4.9 YPC and looked like a total stud. Unless I already have reason to believe that a guy is a star in waiting and/or unless he absolutely wows me in the eyeball test, I can't give him the benefit of the doubt on the basis of so few carries.Your similarity scores seem to bode well for his prospects. Then again, that might say more about your formula than it does about Grant's prospects. I still think the effort is worthwhile and helpful though.

Chris Brown's 2004 season is on there now. But do the guys above him seem like better comps?

 

[Chase Stuart]

I think you somehow need to set some cutoffs that would eliminate certain players once they exceed those limits. i.e., less than 2 TDs, > 29 years old, < 100 carries, etc.Would be arbitrary cutoffs, but some of these cutoffs should eliminate some players that don't deserve to be on the list but the differences in the #'s still keep them on there.

Outside of the Selvin Young comparable, none of the top 30 guys meet those criteria. I think a sliding scale works fine enough here.

 

[Chase Stuart]

What's interesting is how similar Grant and Jacobs look. Same age. Both had their first years as a starter last year. Neither were top 100 picks. Very similar carries and YPC numbers. Grant just has a slight uptick in TDs and receptions.

I haven't heard anyone compare the two, and that's probably because: 1) physically, they're very different; and 2) their post-seasons were very different. Grant's got a slightly higher ADP, which I suppose makes sense considering: 1) his slightly better numbers; 2) his way better post-season; and 3) he has less competition for carries.

 

[Chase Stuart]

In case anyone was wondering, the pre-92 comps are Marv Hubbard, 1971, Wendell Tyler, 1979, Frenchy Fuqua, 1970, George Wonsley, 1985 and Ted McKnight, 1979.

 

[gheemony]

I think you need to factor in Games Started. Grant did this in 8 or so starts, while some of your guys did it in a full season.

Can you factor in second half v. first half splits? That might take into account the fresh legs question.

I was reminded of Corey Dillon's huge second half his rookie year. Everyone assumed you could just double that total and get his stats for his second season. Didn't work out that way. He was good, but not THAT good. That's what I fear with Grant. Kevin Jones, William Green, Julius Jones... just a few backs that had very good second halves when first given the opportunity to play, and then they ... well, you know.

 

[Cass Durham]

I think you need to factor in Games Started. Grant did this in 8 or so starts, while some of your guys did it in a full season.Can you factor in second half v. first half splits? That might take into account the fresh legs question.I was reminded of Corey Dillon's huge second half his rookie year. Everyone assumed you could just double that total and get his stats for his second season. Didn't work out that way. He was good, but not THAT good. That's what I fear with Grant. Kevin Jones, William Green, Julius Jones... just a few backs that had very good second halves when first given the opportunity to play, and then they ... well, you know.

Man....I've been trying to put my finger on Grant for weeks. Indecision has plagued me as he will probably be available at my pick and I was thinking seriously about taking him. Then.....you bring up the name William Green. Now I have to rethink everything...

 

[moderated]

I like the Gary Brown comparison the most. Brown was a bit shorter and stockier, but similar type RB's IMO.

Grant is fortunate to be in an offense with a lot of weapons, but put him on a less explosive team and he's the definition of average. I don't see any hope of him having Priest Holmes/Brian Westbrook type success.

I wouldn't want to bank much on him long-term, but he could be a decent play in the short-term.

 

[Tau837]

1. Why not include Grant's two postseason games? I suppose this might create a problem if you're operating off a regular season stats database, but given Grant started less than a full season last year, IMO using all of his games gives the best representation of his season.

It also busts the 200 carry, 1000 rushing yards, and double digit TD thresholds for Grant. I noticed at least one poster (EBF) mention that he doesn't like to count on seasons with less than 200 carries...

2. On bostonfred's point, I think the reason it skews the comparison is different than the fresh legs angle. In Grant's case, rather than a committee that led to a relatively low total of touches for a full season, it was because he took over as the feature back roughly halfway through the season. The thing is, he performed extremely well once he assumed that role. To me, this is different from others who shared time because those players did not necessarily set themselves up to be their teams' feature RBs in the following seasons, as Grant did.

All that said, I have never found similarity scores to be particularly useful. IMO one can normally look at each comparable and find reasons why that player isn't truly comparable.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

Grant is fortunate to be in an offense with a lot of weapons, but put him on a less explosive team and he's the definition of average. I don't see any hope of him having Priest Holmes/Brian Westbrook type success.

TONS of people called Priest Holmes the definition of average.

 

[moderated]

I like the Gary Brown comparison the most. Brown was a bit shorter and stockier, but similar type RB's IMO.Grant is fortunate to be in an offense with a lot of weapons, but put him on a less explosive team and he's the definition of average. I don't see any hope of him having Priest Holmes/Brian Westbrook type success. I wouldn't want to bank much on him long-term, but he could be a decent play in the short-term.

Priest Holmes was the definition of average.

Ummm, no he wasn't. He was an extremely talented RB when he was healthy. Yes he played in a great offense, but he could do it all, and do it all at an elite level. I can't believe anyone who watched him in his prime could argue differently.

 

[FreeBaGeL]

I like the Gary Brown comparison the most. Brown was a bit shorter and stockier, but similar type RB's IMO.Grant is fortunate to be in an offense with a lot of weapons, but put him on a less explosive team and he's the definition of average. I don't see any hope of him having Priest Holmes/Brian Westbrook type success. I wouldn't want to bank much on him long-term, but he could be a decent play in the short-term.

Priest Holmes was the definition of average.

Ummm, no he wasn't. He was an extremely talented RB when he was healthy. Yes he played in a great offense, but he could do it all, and do it all at an elite level. I can't believe anyone who watched him in his prime could argue differently.

My intent was to show the thoughts on him at the time. I edited my post to make it more clear.Personally, I'm undecided on Priest. But a LOT more people were calling Priest completely mediocre both when he took over the job and during the heart of his career.As I said, I didn't really see enough of him (no Sunday Ticket for me back then) to make a good judgement. Though, it does seem pretty coincidental that **** Vermeil just happened upon 3 of the greatest RBs of our time, and even more coincidental that all of those guys were SUBSTANTIALLY less effective (like, abnormally so) without him.Regardless, Priest was a poor example there, because he was viewed as a mediocre talent in one of the best FF RB situations ever produced by a huge number of people.That said, I don't see how anyone could have watched Ryan Grant last year and think he's completely mediocre. That kid looked phenominal every time he got the ball, whether there was a huge hole or no hole at all.

 

[proninja]

I'm pretty sure you guys have reached the point of completely overthinking this

 

[EBF]

Chris Brown's 2004 season is on there now. But do the guys above him seem like better comps?

It's hard to say without the benefit of hindsight. I see parallels with some of those examples (Rhodes in 2001, Shipp in 2002). I see others that don't really work for me (Chester in 2007, Barlow in 2003). The former are good examples of guys who "came out nowhere" to put up a solid stretch of games whereas the latter were already known quantities during the seasons in question (too many career carries by then). They weren't surprises. When I think of Ryan Grant, I think of an unheralded and untested player who immediately produced at his first opportunity. His success was more surprising than that of many of the players on your list because he was dumped by his original team (albeit in a trade rather than an outright cut) and because he was undrafted. Brandon Jacobs, Rudi Johnson, Marion Barber, Brian Westbrook, Chris Brown, Tatum Bell, and Kevan Barlow were all early draft picks. I consider the 4th round an early pick. The difference between a 4th round pick and a 1st round pick is less than the difference between a 4th round pick and an undrafted player. In terms of pedigree Grant is more like Holmes, Rhodes, Parker, and Shipp. I only compared him to Chris Brown because that's who his production and actual playing style reminded me of. Their pedigrees are a bit different. Brown was drafted as an obvious potential successor to Eddie George whereas Grant was just a guy brought in for pennies because of injuries.

 

[proninja]

Chris Brown's 2004 season is on there now. But do the guys above him seem like better comps?

It's hard to say without the benefit of hindsight. I see parallels with some of those examples (Rhodes in 2001, Shipp in 2002). I see others that don't really work for me (Chester in 2007, Barlow in 2003). The former are good examples of guys who "came out nowhere" to put up a solid stretch of games whereas the latter were already known quantities during the seasons in question (too many career carries by then). They weren't surprises. When I think of Ryan Grant, I think of an unheralded and untested player who immediately produced at his first opportunity. His success was more surprising than that of many of the players on your list because he was dumped by his original team (albeit in a trade rather than an outright cut) and because he was undrafted. Brandon Jacobs, Rudi Johnson, Marion Barber, Brian Westbrook, Chris Brown, Tatum Bell, and Kevan Barlow were all early draft picks. I consider the 4th round an early pick. The difference between a 4th round pick and a 1st round pick is less than the difference between a 4th round pick and an undrafted player. In terms of pedigree Grant is more like Holmes, Rhodes, Parker, and Shipp. I only compared him to Chris Brown because that's who his production and actual playing style reminded me of. Their pedigrees are a bit different. Brown was drafted as an obvious potential successor to Eddie George whereas Grant was just a guy brought in for pennies because of injuries.

I don't mean this in a pissing-in-the-pool way, but so what?

 

[EBF]

Chris Brown's 2004 season is on there now. But do the guys above him seem like better comps?

It's hard to say without the benefit of hindsight. I see parallels with some of those examples (Rhodes in 2001, Shipp in 2002). I see others that don't really work for me (Chester in 2007, Barlow in 2003). The former are good examples of guys who "came out nowhere" to put up a solid stretch of games whereas the latter were already known quantities during the seasons in question (too many career carries by then). They weren't surprises. When I think of Ryan Grant, I think of an unheralded and untested player who immediately produced at his first opportunity. His success was more surprising than that of many of the players on your list because he was dumped by his original team (albeit in a trade rather than an outright cut) and because he was undrafted. Brandon Jacobs, Rudi Johnson, Marion Barber, Brian Westbrook, Chris Brown, Tatum Bell, and Kevan Barlow were all early draft picks. I consider the 4th round an early pick. The difference between a 4th round pick and a 1st round pick is less than the difference between a 4th round pick and an undrafted player. In terms of pedigree Grant is more like Holmes, Rhodes, Parker, and Shipp. I only compared him to Chris Brown because that's who his production and actual playing style reminded me of. Their pedigrees are a bit different. Brown was drafted as an obvious potential successor to Eddie George whereas Grant was just a guy brought in for pennies because of injuries.

I don't mean this in a pissing-in-the-pool way, but so what?

I don't even know what you're asking.

 

[proninja]

Chris Brown's 2004 season is on there now. But do the guys above him seem like better comps?

It's hard to say without the benefit of hindsight. I see parallels with some of those examples (Rhodes in 2001, Shipp in 2002). I see others that don't really work for me (Chester in 2007, Barlow in 2003). The former are good examples of guys who "came out nowhere" to put up a solid stretch of games whereas the latter were already known quantities during the seasons in question (too many career carries by then). They weren't surprises. When I think of Ryan Grant, I think of an unheralded and untested player who immediately produced at his first opportunity. His success was more surprising than that of many of the players on your list because he was dumped by his original team (albeit in a trade rather than an outright cut) and because he was undrafted. Brandon Jacobs, Rudi Johnson, Marion Barber, Brian Westbrook, Chris Brown, Tatum Bell, and Kevan Barlow were all early draft picks. I consider the 4th round an early pick. The difference between a 4th round pick and a 1st round pick is less than the difference between a 4th round pick and an undrafted player. In terms of pedigree Grant is more like Holmes, Rhodes, Parker, and Shipp. I only compared him to Chris Brown because that's who his production and actual playing style reminded me of. Their pedigrees are a bit different. Brown was drafted as an obvious potential successor to Eddie George whereas Grant was just a guy brought in for pennies because of injuries.

I don't mean this in a pissing-in-the-pool way, but so what?

I don't even know what you're asking.

I don't even know what you were trying to say

 

[Unlucky]

I'm pretty sure you guys have reached the point of completely overthinking this

Half the guys on the comparison list are pretty good, and half sucked. It's possible that Grant could be a Gary Brown, but maybe he's a Priest Holmes? Hmm, they are SOOOO similar!A lot of work goes into this, but the problem is correlating the results to future results. There seems to be no way to predict from this list how Grant will do.

 

[switz]

I can show the Year N+1 results soon, but I'm curious to see what people think of the formula first. I'd prefer to make my tweaks before seeing the results.

I think it's dangerous to compare players in similar situations as a prognostic exercise. Even thought the situations may be similar, players are unique, and situations aren't exactly the same. IT is a little different when looking at teams, where past team practices are actually strong indicators of future team practice. But with individual players that gets less and less accurate for predictions.It seems like the point of your exercise is to determine the most comparable player based on performance... but that doesn't seem logical at all.

 

[Portis 26]

Of course it's over-thinking this. That's the whole point of this board. It exists to over-think this obsession of ours.

 

[Sabertooth]

Chris Brown's 2004 season is on there now. But do the guys above him seem like better comps?

It's hard to say without the benefit of hindsight. I see parallels with some of those examples (Rhodes in 2001, Shipp in 2002). I see others that don't really work for me (Chester in 2007, Barlow in 2003). The former are good examples of guys who "came out nowhere" to put up a solid stretch of games whereas the latter were already known quantities during the seasons in question (too many career carries by then). They weren't surprises. When I think of Ryan Grant, I think of an unheralded and untested player who immediately produced at his first opportunity. His success was more surprising than that of many of the players on your list because he was dumped by his original team (albeit in a trade rather than an outright cut) and because he was undrafted. Brandon Jacobs, Rudi Johnson, Marion Barber, Brian Westbrook, Chris Brown, Tatum Bell, and Kevan Barlow were all early draft picks. I consider the 4th round an early pick. The difference between a 4th round pick and a 1st round pick is less than the difference between a 4th round pick and an undrafted player. In terms of pedigree Grant is more like Holmes, Rhodes, Parker, and Shipp. I only compared him to Chris Brown because that's who his production and actual playing style reminded me of. Their pedigrees are a bit different. Brown was drafted as an obvious potential successor to Eddie George whereas Grant was just a guy brought in for pennies because of injuries.

I don't mean this in a pissing-in-the-pool way, but so what?

I don't even know what you're asking.

I don't even know what you were trying to say

What's your problem Kazanski?

 

[gianmarco]

Chris Brown's 2004 season is on there now. But do the guys above him seem like better comps?

It's hard to say without the benefit of hindsight. I see parallels with some of those examples (Rhodes in 2001, Shipp in 2002). I see others that don't really work for me (Chester in 2007, Barlow in 2003). The former are good examples of guys who "came out nowhere" to put up a solid stretch of games whereas the latter were already known quantities during the seasons in question (too many career carries by then). They weren't surprises. When I think of Ryan Grant, I think of an unheralded and untested player who immediately produced at his first opportunity. His success was more surprising than that of many of the players on your list because he was dumped by his original team (albeit in a trade rather than an outright cut) and because he was undrafted. Brandon Jacobs, Rudi Johnson, Marion Barber, Brian Westbrook, Chris Brown, Tatum Bell, and Kevan Barlow were all early draft picks. I consider the 4th round an early pick. The difference between a 4th round pick and a 1st round pick is less than the difference between a 4th round pick and an undrafted player.

In terms of pedigree Grant is more like Holmes, Rhodes, Parker, and Shipp. I only compared him to Chris Brown because that's who his production and actual playing style reminded me of. Their pedigrees are a bit different. Brown was drafted as an obvious potential successor to Eddie George whereas Grant was just a guy brought in for pennies because of injuries.

I don't think Brown's and Grant's playing style are anything alike at all. Brown was an upright, long striding runner and Grant is a much more compact and straight ahead runner. Grant reminds me much more of Portis or Barber in terms of playing style. Chris Brown is probably the last person I'd compare Grant to.

 

[GroveDiesel]

I'm pretty sure you guys have reached the point of completely overthinking this

Not only does it seem to be an exercise that probably doesn't have much value in the long run anyway, but it doesn't even control for factors like differential in overall league numbers. 1000 yards rushing in 1993 is not the same as 1000 yards rushing in 2007. 8 rushing TDs in 2007 is not the same as 8 rushing TDs in 1992. Etc. Not only that, but we all know that TDs are one of the flukiest stats out there. Players can go from 10+ TDs one year to 3 or 4 the next. And yet it was decided to give them even MORE weight than they were originally given. I appreciate breaking things down statistically as much as possible, but comparing players across years becomes very tricky and often times falls flat.

 

[CentralPA]

All this tells me is I need to go back to Algebra class, and then some Trig.

 

[Phurfur]

Can't see how you can compare him with people who got the same number of carries in a full season RBBC, when he only played the second half of the season, or had an MVP caliber performance from his QB, or had an injured, higher pick on the team who had a chance to take carries. My biggest knocks on him is that I think that he was forced into action and succeeded because he had fresh legs against teams that had to worry about Favre. Next year he may share carries, he won't have the advantage of fresh legs, and he won't have Favre to keep defenses away from him. I like the idea of finding similar players, but your model doesnt' seem to address that.

If your fresh legs theory were true I would think you would see allot of teams inserting undrafted rookies into their lineup at mid season if it would get them Grant's production.

 

[baconisgood]

I'm also not really sure your committee point is valid. I take it you're saying it's easier to amass good rushing stats if you have 0 carries in games 1-8, and 20 carries a game in games 9-16, then if you have 10 carries a game every week. I don't really know if that's true.

I would say the main issue with RBBC as comps is that portions of a committee more often end up in with carries in specific situations than a starter. Lendale and CJ are a likely combo for that this year where White will get virtually all goaline and short yardage touches and CJ will get most of the 3rd and long touches and there will be some division between the two for all other carries. This isn't what a starter faces.

Chris Brown's 2004 season is on there now. But do the guys above him seem like better comps?

I don't like the Chris Brown comp really, he wasn't an out of nowhere guy, he was drafted and was the starter in the first game of his second year. His carries are low due to injuries so I really don't think we can learn much from him as an example. Looking at his game logs does take me back to that year as I owned him and watched him rush for 100 yards in the first half only to leave the game ever stinking week it seemed.

 

[Jason Wood]

Similarity scores are intellectually intriguing, but I've never bought into their predictive value one iota, particularly for sports like football with such small sample sizes.

 

[Chase Stuart]

The difference between a 4th round pick and a 1st round pick is less than the difference between a 4th round pick and an undrafted player.

I don't think you mean that.Would you trade your first for two fourths? Of course not. You wouldn't trade your first for two thirds, either. The difference between a 1st and a 4th is huge; the difference between a 4th and an undrafted player isn't very significant.

 

[Todem]

Ryan Grant = overvalued big time.

I don't need formulas to come to that scouting report. Just good old football instincts and a long time playing this silly game. Favre not being there is going to be HUGE. And Brandon Jackson is going to warrent some PT as well. Grant has been out with a hammy already after geting his contract.

Grant got his money....guy was a fluke last season and people will be crying about drafting him in the late second or early 3rd as their RB2 thinking he will be an RB1 type of player.

Good effort though Chase. We just approach fantasy football from completly different perspectives.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Similarity scores are intellectually intriguing, but I've never bought into their predictive value one iota, particularly for sports like football with such small sample sizes.

I agree with this.That said, similarity scores are used by everybody in fantasy football, just not necessarily as empirically as I'm doing here. It's just like how everyone uses VBD to some extent, even if they call it their gut (long before Joe Bryant, people didn't draft kickers and TEs early).

If I said that Ryan Grant was going to be the next Tomlinson, Peterson or Barry Sanders, someone would probably bring up that those guys were top five picks and Grant was undrafted. If I said that Ryan Grant was going to be the next Willie Green or Julius Jones, someone would probably bring up that Grant's YPC was a yard ahead of those guys. If I said Grant was going to be the next Earl Campbell, someone would say he didn't have anywhere near as many carries. If I said Ryan Grant was going to fall off the face of the earth like Shaun Alexander last year, someone would say that Grant isn't anywhere near as old.

Age. Experience. Touches. Production. Draft Status. Those five things are the bulk of what makes up a player's fantasy projections. If I told you RB X was 24 years old, he started last year, had 300-1000-8 with 30 receptions, and was a fourth round rookie last year, you would intuitively have a good feel on how to project him. Obviously questions about his situation are important, but those are actually pretty easy to answer once you know the real player. Now if I told you he was 28, or a first round pick, or had 1500 yards, your projections would change significantly. That's all similarity scores are doing.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Ryan Grant = overvalued big time.I don't need formulas to come to that scouting report. Just good old football instincts and a long time playing this silly game. Favre not being there is going to be HUGE. And Brandon Jackson is going to warrent some PT as well. Grant has been out with a hammy already after geting his contract.Grant got his money....guy was a fluke last season and people will be crying about drafting him in the late second or early 3rd as their RB2 thinking he will be an RB1 type of player.Good effort though Chase. We just approach fantasy football from completly different perspectives.

What did you good old football instincts tell you about Tiki Barber or Willie Parker?

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Similarity scores are intellectually intriguing, but I've never bought into their predictive value one iota, particularly for sports like football with such small sample sizes.

I agree with this.That said, similarity scores are used by everybody in fantasy football, just not necessarily as empirically as I'm doing here. It's just like how everyone uses VBD to some extent, even if they call it their gut (long before Joe Bryant, people didn't draft kickers and TEs early).

If I said that Ryan Grant was going to be the next Tomlinson, Peterson or Barry Sanders, someone would probably bring up that those guys were top five picks and Grant was undrafted. If I said that Ryan Grant was going to be the next Willie Green or Julius Jones, someone would probably bring up that Grant's YPC was a yard ahead of those guys. If I said Grant was going to be the next Earl Campbell, someone would say he didn't have anywhere near as many carries. If I said Ryan Grant was going to fall off the face of the earth like Shaun Alexander last year, someone would say that Grant isn't anywhere near as old.

Age. Experience. Touches. Production. Draft Status. Those five things are the bulk of what makes up a player's fantasy projections. If I told you RB X was 24 years old, he started last year, had 300-1000-8 with 30 receptions, and was a fourth round rookie last year, you would intuitively have a good feel on how to project him. Obviously questions about his situation are important, but those are actually pretty easy to answer once you know the real player. Now if I told you he was 28, or a first round pick, or had 1500 yards, your projections would change significantly. That's all similarity scores are doing.

How sensitive are your results to changes in the coefficients? Since there are an infinite number of top-10 lists of similarities, it seems like an important thing to explore.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Grant has a lot more in common with Priest Holmes than almost anyone else on that list...

Young upon entry into the league

Low number of carries in college

Didn't get a shot in his first couple years for a good reason

Good size

Good power for his size

There's no reason to think he's not legit.

And his status as an UFA is largely explained by the facts that he increased his weight from 215 to 226 after entering the league (which bumped both his size and power from low/marginal to good), and had only had 280 carries in his last two years at Notre Dame.