What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CJ Anderson (1 Viewer)

C.J. Anderson said he does not believe his ankle injury will be a big deal.
Anderson suffered the injury in the second quarter of Week 13 and never returned. The Denver Post's Troy Renck said it "appears" Anderson was kept out "more as a precaution." Even if it turns out to be minor, it is a tough break for a back who just started to find his form. Anderson's status will be updated by Wednesday at the latest.
 
BustedKnuckles said:
C.J. Anderson said he does not believe his ankle injury will be a big deal.
Anderson suffered the injury in the second quarter of Week 13 and never returned. The Denver Post's Troy Renck said it "appears" Anderson was kept out "more as a precaution." Even if it turns out to be minor, it is a tough break for a back who just started to find his form. Anderson's status will be updated by Wednesday at the latest.
Click to expand...
That's nice, especially since I'm going to end up 5 or 10 points short of a points title (and prize), and missing a bye while I'm at it.

But hey...I can take another chance on him next week?

:wall: :wall:

 
renesauz said:
BustedKnuckles said:
C.J. Anderson said he does not believe his ankle injury will be a big deal.
Anderson suffered the injury in the second quarter of Week 13 and never returned. The Denver Post's Troy Renck said it "appears" Anderson was kept out "more as a precaution." Even if it turns out to be minor, it is a tough break for a back who just started to find his form. Anderson's status will be updated by Wednesday at the latest.
Click to expand...
That's nice, especially since I'm going to end up 5 or 10 points short of a points title (and prize), and missing a bye while I'm at it.

But hey...I can take another chance on him next week?

:wall: :wall:
Click to expand...
but if this season tells us anything , its that CJ doesnt play very well if hes dinged up

 
Rats are diving overboard in this topic. CJ says he doesn't think its real bad. It was described by Kubiak as a "pretty good blow" to the ankle. Sounds to me like a bad bruise. May be iffy this week but doesn't sound like there is no chance he can regain his form pretty quickly. A lot better than a rolled ankle for sure. I will wait and see and hope for the best.

 
C.J. Anderson (ankle) was a non-participant in Friday's Broncos practice while Ronnie Hillman (foot) did participate.
Anderson's third straight missed practice bodes poorly for his chances of playing against the Raiders. Hillman is on track to be active, but the health of his foot is clearly a concern, so much so that coach Gary Kubiak suggested Thursday Juwan Thompson could get the Week 14 start. From a workload standpoint, there isn't a muddier backfield in football as the situation currently stands. Dec 11 - 1:32 PM
Source: Mike Klis on Twitter

http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/8694/cj-anderson


Thoughts? Hillman returned to practice. Kubiak reportedly is considering starting Juwan Thompson, although he may have been led into that answer yesterday, as Thompson was the only back practicing at the time.

 
This will be the most pathetic post ever authored in the Shark Pool. Ready?

I played David Cobb over Anderson today. Cobb outscored him 0.1 to 0.0. :lmao:

Yes, my RB situation is THAT dire. And I somehow won, because his Yeldon and Rawls left with injuries! Can't wait for the fun again next week.

 
Raider Nation said:
This will be the most pathetic post ever authored in the Shark Pool. Ready?

I played David Cobb over Anderson today. Cobb outscored him 0.1 to 0.0. :lmao:

Yes, my RB situation is THAT dire. And I somehow won, because his Yeldon and Rawls left with injuries! Can't wait for the fun again next week.
Click to expand...
Congrats. It would have been epic had you won by 0.1.

 
Stealthycat said:
I didn't watch the game - did Brock look pretty good ? I know they didn't get in the end zone but was it because of his play or ??
Click to expand...
Brock played very average. Oak D hunkered down when needed. Shot 68% on 51 attempts, 300 yards, and no turnovers. Uninspired if nothing else, but a fair performance.

 
ShamrockPride said:
Stealthycat said:
I didn't watch the game - did Brock look pretty good ? I know they didn't get in the end zone but was it because of his play or ??
Click to expand...
Brock played very average. Oak D hunkered down when needed. Shot 68% on 51 attempts, 300 yards, and no turnovers. Uninspired if nothing else, but a fair performance.
Click to expand...
There seemed to be a lot of drops by his WRs in key spots. D. Thomas dropped at least two perfect third down passes that I can remember. His numbers should have been a lot better.

 
renesauz said:
ShamrockPride said:
Stealthycat said:
I didn't watch the game - did Brock look pretty good ? I know they didn't get in the end zone but was it because of his play or ??
Click to expand...
Brock played very average. Oak D hunkered down when needed. Shot 68% on 51 attempts, 300 yards, and no turnovers. Uninspired if nothing else, but a fair performance.
Click to expand...
There seemed to be a lot of drops by his WRs in key spots. D. Thomas dropped at least two perfect third down passes that I can remember. His numbers should have been a lot better.
Click to expand...
Yeah, forgot to mention that. DT had another bad case of the dropsies today.

 
BWill said:
I hope he starts next year as the #1 RB
Click to expand...
you'll probably be able to get him at a nice discount next year even if he is the clear cut #1 and hillman is #2 or not on team. two years running people have been burned by the pre-season denver starting RB

 
Will be interesting who stays and who goes. Anderson, hillman, and Thompson are either rfa or Ufa's if I remember right. I'd expect cja to get tendered at the 2nd Rd level and be back and hillman gone. Thompson might hang around, there won't be,a market for him, it's a strong fa rb class with forte, miller, cja, ivory, powell, etc.

 
Robar said:
Will be interesting who stays and who goes. Anderson, hillman, and Thompson are either rfa or Ufa's if I remember right. I'd expect cja to get tendered at the 2nd Rd level and be back and hillman gone. Thompson might hang around, there won't be,a market for him, it's a strong fa rb class with forte, miller, cja, ivory, powell, etc.
Click to expand...
Hillman has to be gone. He's a drive killer. Can't break a tackle to save his life.

 
I like CJ heading into next year. It looks like Hillman is gone and it doesn't really matter if Peyton retires or stays, Denver is going to be built around that defense which means they are going to be run-heavy on offense to control the clock/field position.

Seems like a perfect situation for CJ.

Also, It was obvious that CJ Anderson was hurt going into last year. He struggled early but you can see a clear line of low production and struggles over the first 6 games before he started to get healthy and his production increased.

Over the first six games CJ Anderson production:

- 67 carries

- 180 yards

- 0 rush TDs

- 11 receptions

- 100 receiving yards

- 0 receiving touchdowns

CJ Anderson production over final 10 games:

- 85 rushes

- 540 yards

- 4 rush TDs

- 12 receptions

- 83 receiving yards

- 0 receiving TDs

================

First 6 game averages

Average per game:

- 30 rush yards per game

- 16.6 receiving yards per game

- 2.68 yards per carry


Average per game over final 10 games

- 54 rush yards per game

- 8.3 receiving yards per game

- 6.3 yards per carry

 
Jed said:
There's my 1st round draft pick! 17 games too late. Oh well, maybe next year.
Click to expand...
it's actually quite interesting to me.... CJA's fantasy value has come full circle. guy was a consensus 1st round pick... by week 3 he was a colossal bust being outplayed by Hillman... then slowly beginning week 9 or 10 once everyone had given up on him in redraft he just starts outperforming hillman each week but the timeshare remained. Finally the last game of the year he starts and dominates carries and produces in the superbowl.... putting himself in position to again be the lead dog in a kubiak zone running offense.... which on paper makes him a pre-season top 10 fantasy RB. Because the denver RB position has burned so many over the last 2 years you should be able to get him at a discount in redraft next year if you are willing to take the ride again.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
lod01 said:
Robar said:
Will be interesting who stays and who goes. Anderson, hillman, and Thompson are either rfa or Ufa's if I remember right. I'd expect cja to get tendered at the 2nd Rd level and be back and hillman gone. Thompson might hang around, there won't be,a market for him, it's a strong fa rb class with forte, miller, cja, ivory, powell, etc.
Click to expand...
Hillman has to be gone. He's a drive killer. Can't break a tackle to save his life.
Click to expand...
Completely agree.

 
thatguy said:
lod01 said:
Robar said:
Will be interesting who stays and who goes. Anderson, hillman, and Thompson are either rfa or Ufa's if I remember right. I'd expect cja to get tendered at the 2nd Rd level and be back and hillman gone. Thompson might hang around, there won't be,a market for him, it's a strong fa rb class with forte, miller, cja, ivory, powell, etc.
Click to expand...
Hillman has to be gone. He's a drive killer. Can't break a tackle to save his life.
Click to expand...
Completely agree.
Click to expand...
ya but he DID break off that long TD run once last year :sarcasm:

 
jabarony said:
Bracie Smathers said:
Cecil Lammey ‏@CecilLammey 3m3 minutes ago

The #Broncos are undefeated this year when C.J. Anderson gets 14 or more carries #NEvsDEN 16 for 72 yards today
Click to expand...
Isn't this the case with most rbs, in general? Teams don't necessaily win because their rb gets a good number of carries (especially CJA). More often than not the rbs get more carries when their team is winning.
Click to expand...
There's also the matter of fitting a statistic to its intended result. The 14 carry figure was hand picked, I'm sure, because that was the next highest total above some number of carries that resulted in a loss; there's no magic concerning that number and whether it is deterministic or not.

 
Bruce Hammond said:
jabarony said:
Bracie Smathers said:
Cecil Lammey ‏@CecilLammey 3m3 minutes ago

The #Broncos are undefeated this year when C.J. Anderson gets 14 or more carries #NEvsDEN 16 for 72 yards today
Click to expand...
Isn't this the case with most rbs, in general? Teams don't necessaily win because their rb gets a good number of carries (especially CJA). More often than not the rbs get more carries when their team is winning.
Click to expand...
There's also the matter of fitting a statistic to its intended result. The 14 carry figure was hand picked, I'm sure, because that was the next highest total above some number of carries that resulted in a loss; there's no magic concerning that number and whether it is deterministic or not.
Click to expand...
What is the purpose of doing statistics if not to prove or disprove an intended result?

If you watch football and notice that C.J. Anderson has played solidly you might be curious and go looking to see how he ranks among other RBs and look at those results and then might notice patterns that can be measured.

Cecil Lammey has been a C.J. pimp for a long time so it makes sense he would look for metrics that back his stance that C.J. is a good RB so you might want to toss out anything Lammey comes up with due to bias or if it is a strong stat, you can look at what others use to note anything statistically special about C.J. Anderson.

From today, a different source.

You could do the same thing in reverse to say C.J. Andreson's production prior to week 10 is lower than what he does over the final 6 games over the past two years but for anyone seeking a fantasy edge during crunch time, this seems like a good stat to file away.

-------------

Football Perspective ‏@fbgchase 11m11 minutes ago
No player has more yards from scrimmage starting week 10 over last 2 year than C.J. Anderson http://pfref.com/tiny/oIXo1
 
Bracie Smathers said:
What is the purpose of doing statistics if not to prove or disprove an intended result?

If you watch football and notice that C.J. Anderson has played solidly you might be curious and go looking to see how he ranks among other RBs and look at those results and then might notice patterns that can be measured.

Cecil Lammey has been a C.J. pimp for a long time so it makes sense he would look for metrics that back his stance that C.J. is a good RB so you might want to toss out anything Lammey comes up with due to bias or if it is a strong stat, you can look at what others use to note anything statistically special about C.J. Anderson.

From today, a different source.

You could do the same thing in reverse to say C.J. Andreson's production prior to week 10 is lower than what he does over the final 6 games over the past two years but for anyone seeking a fantasy edge during crunch time, this seems like a good stat to file away.

-------------

Football Perspective ‏@fbgchase 11m11 minutes ago
No player has more yards from scrimmage starting week 10 over last 2 year than C.J. Anderson http://pfref.com/tiny/oIXo1
Click to expand...
The purpose of doing statistics is to test a hypothesis. Good statisticians understand that as humans we are heavily biased towards selecting statistics which fit the outcome we desire, and therefore are extremely suspicious of using statistics in ways which fit the results to the desired outcome. The 14-carry threshold is an example of "multiple endpoints", which is a well-understood statistical fallacy. You can always choose a different endpoint to weaken or reinforce a case; good statisticians don't do that, or at least, they'd be very suspicious of doing it unless they had a specific reason to believe the end point was the right one to choose.

It's one thing if you're a color commentator trying to fill air time by telling a story. It's a completely different thing to assert any kind of statistical validity from known-fallacious statistical methods. And for that matter, it's fallacious to base fantasy football decisions on fallacious methods.

 
By definition the purpose of statistics is to mathematically, collect, analyze, interpret, and present data.


Merriam-Webster dictionary:
-----------------------------------
statistics

Merriam-Webster definition.
statisticsplay
noun plural but singular or plural in construction sta·tis·tics \stə-ˈtis-tiks\
Definition of statistics
Popularity: Top 10% of words
1
: a branch of mathematics dealing with the collection, analysis, interpretation, and presentation of masses of numerical data
2
: a collection of quantitative data


-----------------------------------
Merriam-Webster dictionary:

hypothesis

Full Definition of hypothesis
plural hy·poth·e·sesplay play\-ˌsēz\
1
a : an assumption or concession made for the sake of argument
b : an interpretation of a practical situation or condition taken as the ground for action
2
: a tentative assumption made in order to draw out and test its logical or empiricalconsequences
3
: the antecedent clause of a conditional statement

-----------
I don't care to quibble so I think it is fine to assume a hypothesis is involved with the intended result is to prove or disprove an assumed argument using statistics which makes us both right.

So if the assumption is that C.J. Anderson has looked good down the stretch someone has done the legwork to show that of all NFL RBs over the past two years he ranks 1st which is statistically significant to many fantasy football players which makes noting that stat in a thread on C.J. Anderson relevant.
 
All depends whether you want your stat to explain what already happened (CJ > 14 = win does this) or explain what will happen in the future (CJ > 14 = win does not).

 
Bracie Smathers said:
I don't care to quibble so I think it is fine to assume a hypothesis is involved with the intended result is to prove or disprove an assumed argument using statistics which makes us both right.

So if the assumption is that C.J. Anderson has looked good down the stretch someone has done the legwork to show that of all NFL RBs over the past two years he ranks 1st which is statistically significant to many fantasy football players which makes noting that stat in a thread on C.J. Anderson relevant.
Click to expand...
The intended result is to find out what's actually true, not to reinforce your own assumptions. Drinen's classic "Splits Happen" article points this out nicely; there are going to be splits like CJ's late-season split, but you should be extremely suspicious of drawing any kind of conclusions from them, especially if you're fishing for splits based on arbitrary endpoints.

"CJ has performed well past week 10 in 2014 and 2015" probably has no relevance to what he'll do in weeks 10-16 in 2016 (compared to the rest of the year). That's especially true because by choosing week 10 specifically, you're leaving out his week 8-9 performances, in which he's averaged 38 yards rushing in 2014-2015. So if you chose a more natural split, like the second half of the season, the effect would be a lot less. There's no particular reason why CJ has performed better in week 11 (280 rushing, 3 TD, plus 68 receiving) than in week 8 (52 rushing, 37 receiving, 0 TD), so by excluding week 8 you're fooling yourself about the meaning of this split. That's the multiple endpoints fallacy.

 
Bracie Smathers said:
Doug Kyed ‏@DougKyed  4m4 minutes ago
C.J. Anderson started slow in 2015 but ended regular season with 85 carries, 540 yards, 6.4 yards per carry, 5 TDs in final 9 games.
ProFootballTalk ‏@ProFootballTalk  18m18 minutes ago
Report: Broncos to place lowest RFA tender on RB C.J. Anderson, opening the door for someone else to snatch him http://bit.ly/1QBRthT 
Josh Mensch ‏@JoshMenschNFL  39s40 seconds ago
CJ Anderson in Carolina or New England would be intriguing
Click to expand...
It would be refreshing to have a conversation about an offensive skill-position player that doesn't involve New England. 

 
CalBear said:
It would be refreshing to have a conversation about an offensive skill-position player that doesn't involve New England. 
Click to expand...
There are not a lot of teams that need a RB.  That is the reason why the market is only offering minimum contracts but New England tends to go after bargains at the skill positions so it does make sense.

 
The bigger news to me is that it sounds like Denver is looking for a running back.   Even if they keep him they don't sound like they're at all committed to building around him, which means another very good landing spot for free agent/rookie wrs could be opening up. 

 
Bracie Smathers said:
There are not a lot of teams that need a RB.  That is the reason why the market is only offering minimum contracts but New England tends to go after bargains at the skill positions so it does make sense.
Click to expand...
Apparently they're also going after Calvin Johnson, Josh Gordon, Arian Foster, and every other loosely-affiliated prospect on the first three pages of the Shark Pool. And later on we'll add Matt Forte, Marvin Jones, and most other free agents with a pulse to the list of "I'd like to see him in New England" tweets. It's laziness.

 
CalBear said:
Apparently they're also going after Calvin Johnson, Josh Gordon, Arian Foster, and every other loosely-affiliated prospect on the first three pages of the Shark Pool. And later on we'll add Matt Forte, Marvin Jones, and most other free agents with a pulse to the list of "I'd like to see him in New England" tweets. It's laziness.
Click to expand...
I'm not a Pat fan.  Calvin is retired, Josh Gordon is under contract and hasn't been reinstated, Arian Foster is still injured and wouldn't pass a team physical right now and probably won't for months, and Matt Forte is asking far from the NFL minimum contract and rumor is he is going to meet with the Pack.  

CJ is a bargain and the speculation he would fit in New England makes sense due to the fact they could use an upgrade and they do seek out bargains.  Its speculation but its not inane Pat homerism that floods this board.

 
If I understand correctly that if any team, including NE, makes offer, Denver can make a better offer.

So, no I don't think Patriots will pay so much that Denver will not match that offer. I'm thinking something like Raiders who have a lot to spend can make offer that Broncos can't match. They gave him tender because they think no one will give Anderson that much when there is a lot of Rb's on the market. There's a good chance Anderson will stay and Broncos won't have to pay him too much. I might be completely wrong, but Denver likes him and they are not looking for a replacement, they are just making business as usual.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

B
Titans runningbacks 2024
2
Replies
51
Views
4K
Bri
B
EBF
2025 Rookie Thoughts
2
Replies
57
Views
7K
EBF
EBF
EBF
2024 Rookie Thoughts
Replies
32
Views
6K
EBF
EBF

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top