Consistency is everything! (1 Viewer)

[timschochet]

Past performances don't matter, unless they're very recent. Averages don't matter, because large numbers will skew the results. What you want in the FF playoffs are running backs that barring injury you can count on. Who are the most consistent?

In making this list I examined the last four weeks for each RB to establish a consistent pattern. I awarded 1 pt for 17 or more carries per week, 1 pt for 75 or more yards per week, and 1 pt for at least one TD for week. Any numbers above these minimums I ignored. The idea is, I will be happy to be able to rely on at least 17 carries, 75 yards, and 1 TD. If I can get that from each of my running backs, I win.

There are two lists here: a top ten list for RBs with 4 recent healthy weeks to draw in, and a partial list based on RB's who have started more recently and therefore have a sample of less than 4 weeks.

Top ten most consistent RBs based on last 4 weeks:

1. Marshawn Lynch (obviously excludes last game.)

2. Addai

3. MacGahee

4. Westbrook

5. Grant

6. Graham

7. Jacobs

8. FWP

9. LT

10. Edge

Partial list (based on 2 or 3 games)

1.Maurice Morris

2. Steven Jackson

3. Chatman

4. LenDale

5. Fargas

These are the RBs, therefore, that I would want going into the playoffs...

 

[timschochet]

If Travis Henry is suspended, then Selvin Young is high on the second list of RBs.

 

[the spanker]

Past performances don't matter, unless they're very recent. Averages don't matter, because large numbers will skew the results. What you want in the FF playoffs are running backs that barring injury you can count on. Who are the most consistent?In making this list I examined the last four weeks for each RB to establish a consistent pattern. I awarded 1 pt for 17 or more carries per week, 1 pt for 75 or more yards per week, and 1 pt for at least one TD for week. Any numbers above these minimums I ignored. The idea is, I will be happy to be able to rely on at least 17 carries, 75 yards, and 1 TD. If I can get that from each of my running backs, I win.There are two lists here: a top ten list for RBs with 4 recent healthy weeks to draw in, and a partial list based on RB's who have started more recently and therefore have a sample of less than 4 weeks.Top ten most consistent RBs based on last 4 weeks:1. Marshawn Lynch (obviously excludes last game.)2. Addai3. MacGahee4. Westbrook5. Grant6. Graham7. Jacobs8. FWP9. LT10. EdgePartial list (based on 2 or 3 games)1.Maurice Morris2. Steven Jackson3. Chatman4. LenDale5. FargasThese are the RBs, therefore, that I would want going into the playoffs...

I'm in PPR so your list doesn't apply to a lot of leagues out there.

 

[timschochet]

Past performances don't matter, unless they're very recent. Averages don't matter, because large numbers will skew the results. What you want in the FF playoffs are running backs that barring injury you can count on. Who are the most consistent?In making this list I examined the last four weeks for each RB to establish a consistent pattern. I awarded 1 pt for 17 or more carries per week, 1 pt for 75 or more yards per week, and 1 pt for at least one TD for week. Any numbers above these minimums I ignored. The idea is, I will be happy to be able to rely on at least 17 carries, 75 yards, and 1 TD. If I can get that from each of my running backs, I win.There are two lists here: a top ten list for RBs with 4 recent healthy weeks to draw in, and a partial list based on RB's who have started more recently and therefore have a sample of less than 4 weeks.Top ten most consistent RBs based on last 4 weeks:1. Marshawn Lynch (obviously excludes last game.)2. Addai3. MacGahee4. Westbrook5. Grant6. Graham7. Jacobs8. FWP9. LT10. EdgePartial list (based on 2 or 3 games)1.Maurice Morris2. Steven Jackson3. Chatman4. LenDale5. FargasThese are the RBs, therefore, that I would want going into the playoffs...

I'm in PPR so your list doesn't apply to a lot of leagues out there.

I think it still could. You'd be hard put to find a RB who gets enough receptions to significantly change this list. Maybe Westbrook moves up a few spots, but he's already at #4.

 

[CalBear]

Do you have some basis for your assumption that the last four weeks are a good measure of a back's reliability?

 

[Blackjacks]

7 weeks of 10 or more points should put Reggie Bush on that list somewhere shouldn't it?

 

[timschochet]

Do you have some basis for your assumption that the last four weeks are a good measure of a back's reliability?

Obviously, 4 is a random number that I chose, though not without some thought. The most important figure here is number of touches. What we want is a RB who we know is going to get a good number of carries week in and week out. What teams will stick with the running back, and which teams go away from the running game altogether when they're behind? (Two examples: you can count on Parker to get 20 carries every game. Kevin Jones production, on th other hand, is very dependent on whether or not the Lions are ahead or behind.) Next come number of yards, but that's almost always connected to number of carries unless the back is just terrible (like Shaun Alexander). TDs are the hardest to predict, but even there certain patterns can be detected (for example, it's become increasingly obvious that Droughns comes in for Jacobs in all close yardage situations, which reduces Jacob's productivity.)So why 4 weeks? I wanted a recent sample that was long enough but not too long. It's purely subjective, though, but I think justifiable.

 

[timschochet]

7 weeks of 10 or more points should put Reggie Bush on that list somewhere shouldn't it?

He's just not getting enough carries per game. Bush is performing very well with the amount of carries he is getting, and he could very well have a more explosive game than several of the players on this list, but this is about consistency. Unless Bush gets more carries, you just can't rely on him.

 

[ckalltheway]

Again it depends on your league. Reggie's been 15-25 points a week in my league since week 4. Had 12 catches yesterday and always has 4-? catches per game. Very important in PPR.

 

[Superbowl Shuffle]

7 weeks of 10 or more points should put Reggie Bush on that list somewhere shouldn't it?

He's just not getting enough carries per game. Bush is performing very well with the amount of carries he is getting, and he could very well have a more explosive game than several of the players on this list, but this is about consistency. Unless Bush gets more carries, you just can't rely on him.

Reggie Bush has been VERY consistent in my PPR league, especially once Deuce was out. 7, 12, 21, 20, 17, 19, 17, 30, 18, 20So if 70% of Reggie's games he was between 17 and 21 points, how does that not meet your definition of consistency? His only outlier since the Deuce injury was above the average production.

 

[MDSkinner]

7 weeks of 10 or more points should put Reggie Bush on that list somewhere shouldn't it?

He's just not getting enough carries per game. Bush is performing very well with the amount of carries he is getting, and he could very well have a more explosive game than several of the players on this list, but this is about consistency. Unless Bush gets more carries, you just can't rely on him.

I am not a Bush fan, but in PPR he certainly belongs on that list probably really high on it. In Non-ppr over the last 4 weeks he is averaging over 14 points a game, in PPR it is quite a bit higher than that. Compare that to Grant for instance who is averaging 12 PPG (non-ppr again) and it makes me question your logic. Does not make a lot of sense to me that Grant would be that high anyway. I can see Bush not being on the list (non-ppr) but Grant has been anything but consistent 13 points a game (which would equate to 75 and a TD).

 

[timschochet]

7 weeks of 10 or more points should put Reggie Bush on that list somewhere shouldn't it?

He's just not getting enough carries per game. Bush is performing very well with the amount of carries he is getting, and he could very well have a more explosive game than several of the players on this list, but this is about consistency. Unless Bush gets more carries, you just can't rely on him.

Reggie Bush has been VERY consistent in my PPR league, especially once Deuce was out. 7, 12, 21, 20, 17, 19, 17, 30, 18, 20So if 70% of Reggie's games he was between 17 and 21 points, how does that not meet your definition of consistency? His only outlier since the Deuce injury was above the average production.

I can't argue with you, you're right. I did not emphasize receptions in my list, and it appears to leave out Bush, who otherwise would be very high. Fair enough, I apologize for doing so. I won't change the whole list around because I still believe that in most cases, number of receptions is too variable for this list. But other than Bush, is there anyone else that deserves to be discussed based on receptions?

 

[timschochet]

7 weeks of 10 or more points should put Reggie Bush on that list somewhere shouldn't it?

He's just not getting enough carries per game. Bush is performing very well with the amount of carries he is getting, and he could very well have a more explosive game than several of the players on this list, but this is about consistency. Unless Bush gets more carries, you just can't rely on him.

I am not a Bush fan, but in PPR he certainly belongs on that list probably really high on it. In Non-ppr over the last 4 weeks he is averaging over 14 points a game, in PPR it is quite a bit higher than that. Compare that to Grant for instance who is averaging 12 PPG (non-ppr again) and it makes me question your logic. Does not make a lot of sense to me that Grant would be that high anyway. I can see Bush not being on the list (non-ppr) but Grant has been anything but consistent 13 points a game (which would equate to 75 and a TD).

I addressed Bush above, but as far as Grant goes, don't forget that this list is not based on averages but on minimums. I don't use your scoring system, but Grant is getting a high number of carries and yardage. TD's are obviously much more variable and hard to predict, which is why Grant is probably not at your 13 points a game. But he is at this time one of the most consistent RB's in the league.

 

[MDSkinner]

I addressed Bush above, but as far as Grant goes, don't forget that this list is not based on averages but on minimums. I don't use your scoring system, but Grant is getting a high number of carries and yardage. TD's are obviously much more variable and hard to predict, which is why Grant is probably not at your 13 points a game. But he is at this time one of the most consistent RB's in the league.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you, then. I had assumed you were basing your consistency check on minimums and that is why I brought the idea of average into play. Clearly Grant averaging 12 PPG (in my system) his minimums are less than that. For instance this past week, 90 total yards and no TD's and 2 weeks ago at 92 total yards and no TD's and 3 weeks ago at 112 yards and no TD's. Admittedly, this is consistent, in fact very consistent, but if you are looking for a consistency of 75 and a TD I do not see that 92 and 0 TD's as being equivalent from a fantasy perspective. I agree that you can not predict TD's, not at all, but it seems clear based on his limited playing time that he is not going to be a guy that consistently scores you the points that you are looking for. In fact, only once has he scored more than your 75 and a TD in my league. I believe FWP (who I own in every league) also fits into that category.I like the list, but I think there are some flaws. Perhaps that is because this is a subjective list, eh?

 

[The Redbeard]

No Portis what-so-ever? Even with you criteria, he must have enough "points" to appear somewhere on your list?

 

[EdwardCat]

LT gets a fair amount of receiving yards. Your analysis is flawed since nearly all leagues I've ever heard of award receiving yards for RBs. Also, there are a few RBs where PPR would seriously skew your analysis. The number of carries shouldn't matter either. Whether a RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries or 30 carries, they still get 110 yards. What should matter is their raw output...total yards and TDs. Carries are not an output.

 

[timschochet]

LT gets a fair amount of receiving yards. Your analysis is flawed since nearly all leagues I've ever heard of award receiving yards for RBs. Also, there are a few RBs where PPR would seriously skew your analysis. The number of carries shouldn't matter either. Whether a RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries or 30 carries, they still get 110 yards. What should matter is their raw output...total yards and TDs. Carries are not an output.

I agree my list is flawed regarding receptions in regards to those RBs who we KNOW are going to get a certain number of receptions every game. As far as I know, this means Bush, LT, and Westbrook, no one else. But as far as number of carries goes, I couldn't disagree with you more. If, as you say, an RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries, this is obviously an indicator of INCONSISTENCY, since how many RB's average over 10 yrds a carry? If you have a RB with at least 17-22 carries a game, then you know that RB is always going to be productive for you; that's what you want.We can argue methodology all day long. My formula is simplified and certainly by no means perfect. But my larger point is that we should emphasize consistency when trying to figure out who's going to do well going forward. Nothing else matters.

 

[EdwardCat]

LT gets a fair amount of receiving yards. Your analysis is flawed since nearly all leagues I've ever heard of award receiving yards for RBs. Also, there are a few RBs where PPR would seriously skew your analysis. The number of carries shouldn't matter either. Whether a RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries or 30 carries, they still get 110 yards. What should matter is their raw output...total yards and TDs. Carries are not an output.

I agree my list is flawed regarding receptions in regards to those RBs who we KNOW are going to get a certain number of receptions every game. As far as I know, this means Bush, LT, and Westbrook, no one else. But as far as number of carries goes, I couldn't disagree with you more. If, as you say, an RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries, this is obviously an indicator of INCONSISTENCY, since how many RB's average over 10 yrds a carry? If you have a RB with at least 17-22 carries a game, then you know that RB is always going to be productive for you; that's what you want.We can argue methodology all day long. My formula is simplified and certainly by no means perfect. But my larger point is that we should emphasize consistency when trying to figure out who's going to do well going forward. Nothing else matters.

That only works when you agree with the analysis. I don't agree that this analysis shows what you want it to.

 

[the spanker]

LT gets a fair amount of receiving yards. Your analysis is flawed since nearly all leagues I've ever heard of award receiving yards for RBs. Also, there are a few RBs where PPR would seriously skew your analysis. The number of carries shouldn't matter either. Whether a RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries or 30 carries, they still get 110 yards. What should matter is their raw output...total yards and TDs. Carries are not an output.

I agree my list is flawed regarding receptions in regards to those RBs who we KNOW are going to get a certain number of receptions every game. As far as I know, this means Bush, LT, and Westbrook, no one else. But as far as number of carries goes, I couldn't disagree with you more. If, as you say, an RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries, this is obviously an indicator of INCONSISTENCY, since how many RB's average over 10 yrds a carry? If you have a RB with at least 17-22 carries a game, then you know that RB is always going to be productive for you; that's what you want.We can argue methodology all day long. My formula is simplified and certainly by no means perfect. But my larger point is that we should emphasize consistency when trying to figure out who's going to do well going forward. Nothing else matters.

Why is Graham so high? I own Graham and now I'm scared to start him with Pittman back in the mix stealing carries/receptions.

 

[EdwardCat]

LT gets a fair amount of receiving yards. Your analysis is flawed since nearly all leagues I've ever heard of award receiving yards for RBs. Also, there are a few RBs where PPR would seriously skew your analysis. The number of carries shouldn't matter either. Whether a RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries or 30 carries, they still get 110 yards. What should matter is their raw output...total yards and TDs. Carries are not an output.

I agree my list is flawed regarding receptions in regards to those RBs who we KNOW are going to get a certain number of receptions every game. As far as I know, this means Bush, LT, and Westbrook, no one else. But as far as number of carries goes, I couldn't disagree with you more. If, as you say, an RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries, this is obviously an indicator of INCONSISTENCY, since how many RB's average over 10 yrds a carry? If you have a RB with at least 17-22 carries a game, then you know that RB is always going to be productive for you; that's what you want.We can argue methodology all day long. My formula is simplified and certainly by no means perfect. But my larger point is that we should emphasize consistency when trying to figure out who's going to do well going forward. Nothing else matters.

Why is Graham so high? I own Graham and now I'm scared to start him with Pittman back in the mix stealing carries/receptions.

Really? Even after Graham had 100 yards rushing and a TD even with Pittman in the mix? How about the fact that Pittman really didn't carries until the game was well out of reach?

 

[awesomeness]

consistency is better for the regular season than in the playoffs imo. You could have 2 RB's each with 100 yards and a TD, but if your opponent has LT for example and he scores 4 TD's you are pretty much going to lose. The only way i see your theory working is if you got Tom Brady on your team.

 

[EdwardCat]

consistency is better for the regular season than in the playoffs imo. You could have 2 RB's each with 100 yards and a TD, but if your opponent has LT for example and he scores 4 TD's you are pretty much going to lose. The only way i see your theory working is if you got Tom Brady on your team.

A better gauge of this would be to look at matchups rather than past performance. I also don't agree with only looking at the last 4 weeks in terms of consistency. Why choose an arbitrary number like 4 weeks and then call it the benchmark for consistency while 5 couldn't be? There isn't a given reason why. My only guess is that it relates to when a certain RB started so that's why Tim choose that timespan. If you go back any further, it might skew the results as related to that particular RB.

 

[the spanker]

LT gets a fair amount of receiving yards. Your analysis is flawed since nearly all leagues I've ever heard of award receiving yards for RBs. Also, there are a few RBs where PPR would seriously skew your analysis. The number of carries shouldn't matter either. Whether a RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries or 30 carries, they still get 110 yards. What should matter is their raw output...total yards and TDs. Carries are not an output.

I agree my list is flawed regarding receptions in regards to those RBs who we KNOW are going to get a certain number of receptions every game. As far as I know, this means Bush, LT, and Westbrook, no one else. But as far as number of carries goes, I couldn't disagree with you more. If, as you say, an RB gets 110 yards on 10 carries, this is obviously an indicator of INCONSISTENCY, since how many RB's average over 10 yrds a carry? If you have a RB with at least 17-22 carries a game, then you know that RB is always going to be productive for you; that's what you want.We can argue methodology all day long. My formula is simplified and certainly by no means perfect. But my larger point is that we should emphasize consistency when trying to figure out who's going to do well going forward. Nothing else matters.

Why is Graham so high? I own Graham and now I'm scared to start him with Pittman back in the mix stealing carries/receptions.

Really? Even after Graham had 100 yards rushing and a TD even with Pittman in the mix? How about the fact that Pittman really didn't carries until the game was well out of reach?

Pitt had 10 carries for 44 yards. Graham had only one reception and he was lucky to score a TD late in the game. I'm in a PPR league and catches passes makes your RB less bustproof for a bad week as TDs are hard to predict. I don't know what to do with my RBs anymore. KJ, Edge, Graham...Bush is the only one I can count on for consistent 15-20 pts per game. I'm really just thinking about relying on my WRs for the playoffs since we play 1 RB/ 2WR with 1 RB or WR for flex.T.O. and TJ are no brainers for me to start. I've also got Roy Williams and Branch. really thinking about going with Roy the rest of the way.

 

[EdwardCat]

Why is Graham so high? I own Graham and now I'm scared to start him with Pittman back in the mix stealing carries/receptions.

Really? Even after Graham had 100 yards rushing and a TD even with Pittman in the mix? How about the fact that Pittman really didn't carries until the game was well out of reach?

Pitt had 10 carries for 44 yards. Graham had only one reception and he was lucky to score a TD late in the game. I'm in a PPR league and catches passes makes your RB less bustproof for a bad week as TDs are hard to predict. I don't know what to do with my RBs anymore. KJ, Edge, Graham...Bush is the only one I can count on for consistent 15-20 pts per game. I'm really just thinking about relying on my WRs for the playoffs since we play 1 RB/ 2WR with 1 RB or WR for flex.T.O. and TJ are no brainers for me to start. I've also got Roy Williams and Branch. really thinking about going with Roy the rest of the way.

Pittman's carries all came in garbage time.

 

[the spanker]

Why is Graham so high? I own Graham and now I'm scared to start him with Pittman back in the mix stealing carries/receptions.

Really? Even after Graham had 100 yards rushing and a TD even with Pittman in the mix? How about the fact that Pittman really didn't carries until the game was well out of reach?

Pitt had 10 carries for 44 yards. Graham had only one reception and he was lucky to score a TD late in the game. I'm in a PPR league and catches passes makes your RB less bustproof for a bad week as TDs are hard to predict. I don't know what to do with my RBs anymore. KJ, Edge, Graham...Bush is the only one I can count on for consistent 15-20 pts per game. I'm really just thinking about relying on my WRs for the playoffs since we play 1 RB/ 2WR with 1 RB or WR for flex.T.O. and TJ are no brainers for me to start. I've also got Roy Williams and Branch. really thinking about going with Roy the rest of the way.

Pittman's carries all came in garbage time.

It was his first game back too and he still got double digit carries. I wouldn't be surprised to see him much more involved plus he eats up all of those passes that would go to Graham.He hurts Graham's value without a doubt IMHO.

 

[EdwardCat]

Why is Graham so high? I own Graham and now I'm scared to start him with Pittman back in the mix stealing carries/receptions.

Really? Even after Graham had 100 yards rushing and a TD even with Pittman in the mix? How about the fact that Pittman really didn't carries until the game was well out of reach?

Pitt had 10 carries for 44 yards. Graham had only one reception and he was lucky to score a TD late in the game. I'm in a PPR league and catches passes makes your RB less bustproof for a bad week as TDs are hard to predict. I don't know what to do with my RBs anymore. KJ, Edge, Graham...Bush is the only one I can count on for consistent 15-20 pts per game. I'm really just thinking about relying on my WRs for the playoffs since we play 1 RB/ 2WR with 1 RB or WR for flex.T.O. and TJ are no brainers for me to start. I've also got Roy Williams and Branch. really thinking about going with Roy the rest of the way.

Pittman's carries all came in garbage time.

It was his first game back too and he still got double digit carries. I wouldn't be surprised to see him much more involved plus he eats up all of those passes that would go to Graham.He hurts Graham's value without a doubt IMHO.

There was also a lot of garbage time. Earnest Graham scored 17 points in my league. I'd call that pretty good regardless of Pittman putting a dent in Graham's production.

 

[the spanker]

Why is Graham so high? I own Graham and now I'm scared to start him with Pittman back in the mix stealing carries/receptions.

Really? Even after Graham had 100 yards rushing and a TD even with Pittman in the mix? How about the fact that Pittman really didn't carries until the game was well out of reach?

Pitt had 10 carries for 44 yards. Graham had only one reception and he was lucky to score a TD late in the game. I'm in a PPR league and catches passes makes your RB less bustproof for a bad week as TDs are hard to predict. I don't know what to do with my RBs anymore. KJ, Edge, Graham...Bush is the only one I can count on for consistent 15-20 pts per game. I'm really just thinking about relying on my WRs for the playoffs since we play 1 RB/ 2WR with 1 RB or WR for flex.T.O. and TJ are no brainers for me to start. I've also got Roy Williams and Branch. really thinking about going with Roy the rest of the way.

Pittman's carries all came in garbage time.

It was his first game back too and he still got double digit carries. I wouldn't be surprised to see him much more involved plus he eats up all of those passes that would go to Graham.He hurts Graham's value without a doubt IMHO.

There was also a lot of garbage time. Earnest Graham scored 17 points in my league. I'd call that pretty good regardless of Pittman putting a dent in Graham's production.

I'm not disputing the amount of pts he scored. What I am saying is that I think Pitt will become more of a factor as time goes on. Those 17pts probably would have been 25-30+ pts without Pitt being there.