Good posting, Jerk!
Thanks, and I want to add that I don't see KC's defense improving to the extent that Indy's did in 2005. Even if it did, I believe the rushing totals are less likely to decrease due to better defense.In case it wasn't clear from my data, I believe that barring injury, LJ will be less likely to see a significant decrease in his numbers in 2006 (like Peyton in 2005). And even if his numbers have a Manning-esque decline, people selecting him will somehow have to be content with the 1900 yards and 19 TDs listed in my original post (#48).
Your analysis assumes that it is appropriate to scale up LJ's last 8 games to 16 games before applying a decline. That has proven to be a bad assumption over the years, and IMO makes your analysis flawed.I do agree that LJ will likely perform well. But to say that if he suffers a large decline his owners must "settle" for 1900/19 is implying a floor that is much too high.
JWB, I appreciate your response, but you need to read the initial post by Keys Myaths to understand the context of my reply. His initial post compared LJ's 2006 expectations to Peyton's 2005 expectations. He made a pretty good point that very few people expected Peyton's numbers to drop off to the extent that they did this year. I thought it would be interesting to apply a similar decline to LJ's prorated numbers. It is in that context where I implied the "settling" for 1900 yards and 19 TDs. I did not state that as a floor.If you're asking me to define a floor, I would go slightly lower, because I agree with your point that it is not as simple as extrapolating LJ's second half over a full season. And as always, the usual disclaimer about injuries must be made...
For me, I'd feel comfortable taking 80% of his second half numbers, prorated for 16 games. This makes sense to me becuase it reduces his projected season total carries to below 400, still high but definitely achievable. That would put him at roughly 1900 rushing yards, 300 receiving yards and 24 TDs. Now, apply the "Manning 2005 reduction factor" to these numbers, and the end result is 1600 rushing yards, 250 or so receiving yards, 16 total TDs. Personally, I think it less likely that LJ's TD numbers go that low, but this is a floor projection, so only one TD a game is certainly possible.
I would further adjust these numbers based on the offensive line health and Priest Holmes' expected role as the season approaches. However, I think that these projections are extremely conservative, especially for TDs, when you consider two sets of statistics:
1. Holmes' stats over the 15 games he started in 2004-05:
1343 rush + 384 rec = 1727 total yards with 22 total TDs (getting only 2/3 of the work in 7 of those games).
2. LJ's 2005 numbers:
1750 rushing yards (2093 total yards) this year and 21 total TDs despite having only nine starts.
Ultimately, this analysis comes down to which running back do you want to pick first in a draft. If Alexander re-signs with Seattle, I would take him first, no question. He's a proven commodity, with a younger OL that is at least as good as KC's. However, you have to project a decline in his numbers, too, given that Seattle figures to have a more difficult schedule and now has the SB target on their jerseys. Even so, Alexander has the highest floor.
After Alexander, I think it comes down to LJ vs. LT with Edge looking on from the outside. Personally, I'll take LJ if I get that chance. I think LT has the higher floor, but LJ has the higher ceiling. So it ultimately comes down to how you like to draft in the first round: if faced with a choice, do you go with a higher ceiling or a higher floor? That's what makes this game interesting. If we all agreed on the analysis of every player, the draft would be exceedingly boring.
