Chase Stuart
Footballguy
I'd have a hard time coming up with projections for Tomlinson, Roy Williams and Rudi Johnson that are both realistic and would make me rather roster Williams/Johnson than Tomlinson.
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!
Debate over LTs value... (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter TheLastDispatch
- Start date
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Why?It seems to me that making projections for LT should be easier than it is for most players because of how consistent he has been throughout his career. He has a strong track record to use as a guide. Main question in projecting him moving forward is how much do you believe the addition of McNiel and the offensive line will affect his performance moving forward? This is an offensive line that has been steadily improving as well as the complimentary weapons around it.There must be some reason that LTs performance drasticly improved in 2006 right?1. Oline improved.2. Rivers 1st year starter leading to leaning more heavily on LT.feel free to add more reasons.Reasons for LTs performance to improve in 20071. Norv Turner who has a track record of funnelling an offense through the primary RB.2. Oline improves from another year of continuity. McNiel was only a rookie last year.Reasons for LTs performance to decline in 20071. regression to the mean.feel free to add more reasons.
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG
Moderator
"Only" 28 years old? A WR might "only" be 28 years old, but when you're talking dynasty RBs, 28 is dangerously close to the precipice. Only 8 times in the history of the NFL has an RB scored 250 fantasy points at the age of 30 or older. The complete list is Holmes, Barber, Riggins, CuMart, Peyton (twice), Charlie Garner, and Corey Dillon. Note the absence on this list of names like Marshall Faulk, Emmitt Smith, Barry Sanders, Terrell Davis, Eric Dickerson, Earl Campbell, Ricky Williams, or any of a ton of other "superstud" fantasy RBs who, at one point in time, nobody could CONCEIVE of ever declining. Basically, historically speaking, Tomlinson has one, maybe two years left as a stud RB, and then another year as a serviceable RB1/RB2, and that's probably it for his entire career... assuming he doesn't finally succumb to his workload and get injured before that.
I think it's a good idea not to look too far ahead in dynasty (I also project out three seasons), but there's another factor to consider- exit value. For instance, let's say that Lee Evans and Marvin Harrison are both going to get 1200 yards and 10 TDs every season for the next three years. Who would you rather own? I'd rather own Lee Evans, because after those three seasons, he'll still have some "exit value"- I can either keep him and keep expecting stud production, or else I can trade him for someone else. At 31 years old, Tomlinson is not going to have much "exit value" at all, no matter what happens... but Steven Jackson will be 27 and could have as much exit value at that point as Tomlinson has this year. Even if Tomlinson outproduces SJax during that span, as long as SJax makes it into the elite tier (and personally, I am convinced that he will), SJax will be worth so much more after that three year span that he'll make up any value differential immediately.
I think that's an unrealistic projection. Outside of the age factor (only twice in the history of the NFL has a 30-year old RB surpassed 20 TDs), there's the fact that prior to last year, Tomlinson had only once gotten 20 TDs, and never more. Projecting that as a FLOOR over the next three years is going a little bit overboard.
Is that a reflection of your extraordinarily high opinion of Tomlinson, or is it a reflection of your relatively low opinion of Johnson/Williams?If someone offered you your pick of a player you have ranked between 6 and 10, as well as your pick of a second player you have ranked between 11 and 20, is there any player combination that would get you to pull the trigger? What about your pick of any two players ranked between 6 and 10? What about a player ranked between 3-5 and another ranked between 11-20? Three players between 11 and 20? If someone offered you S-Jax (or whoever you have ranked #2 overall), how much more would you ask for before you were willing to seal the deal? Would you do it if they added the 20th ranked player on your board? The 15th?
TheLastDispatch
Footballguy
I think what Chase is saying isn't that he can't realistically project LTs 2007 season, but that he can't realistically project it and have it be less value than Rudi and Roy's. Basically he's saying it's a stretch that Rudi and Roy will be worth more than LT next year.
SSOG
Moderator
2. Age/workload.Tomlinson just reached the 2,000 carry plateau. The season after Emmitt Smith got his 2,000th carry, his ypc dropped to 3.7 (lowest in his career, outside of Arizona) and he rushed for 1204 yards, failing to crack 1450 yards rushing for the first year since he was a rookie (he never reached that 1450 plateau again). The next season he set a new non-rookie rushing low (1074) and failed to get double-digit TDs for the first time in his career (4 total that season). Smith was just coming off of a string of four straight #1 fantasy finishes, and his owners probably wouldn't have given him up for anything, either. The season that Walter Peyton got his 2000th carry, he finished 13th- his first finish outside of the top 5 since he was a rookie. The following season, he finished as the 16th ranked RB. Unlike Emmitt, Payton managed to rebound, reeling off 4 straight top-5 finishes again after that, but the dip was definitely there. Marshall Faulk was coming off of four straight top-3 finishes. He fell to 14th, and never finished higher than that again. I'm not suggesting that the 2,000 carry number is magic or anything, I'm just suggesting that there is a long and easily demonstrated history of RBs losing effectiveness as their career workload mounts. Nobody ever sees it coming... but perhaps they should.
CalBear
Footballguy
I don't think there's a history of RBs losing effectiveness as their workload mounts; I think there's a history of RBs losing effectiveness as they get older. I don't see evidence that more carries from age 21-27 is correlated with a greater dropoff from age 28-32. Curtis Martin led the league in rushing at age 31 after having a tremendous workload his entire career (#3 all-time in rushes). Walter Payton (#2 all-time in rushes) had one of his best seasons at age 30. Emmitt Smitn (#1 all-time) had a remarkably successful season at age 35 for the freakin' Arizona Cardinals. Jerome Bettis (#4) had 13 TDs at age 32. Barry Sanders (#5) had the best season of his career at age 29.Tomlinson is a workhorse back; sure, he could get injured, but there's no reason to expect that he's any more likely to get injured than any other RB his age. Certainly the fact that he had 372 carries in 2002 doesn't significantly contribute to his injury risk in 2007.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Yes only 28. I mean how young does a player have to be for one to not be concerned about them declining? If you are saying it is younger than 28 that is leaving a very small window of possibilities for a player to be in thier prime when some players careers are not even getting started until they are 24 or 25.You give 8 examples of players scoring over 250 pts after they were 30 years old. LT will not be that old for another 2 years. BTW I think LT is better than any of those players who have done except for sweetness. LT has broken the mold and is a RB of such talent that all other RBs will be compared to him for decades after people have forgotten about the rest.LT has the heart of a lion and the work ethic to be the best he can be. Those things are not going to change. He has a playing style that does not lead to him taking huge hits and the toughness similar to Martin and Peyton. I little doubt that LT will be added to this list of players performing at a high level after he is 30 years old which is still 3 years away.Looking at what happened last year with him. Somthing clicked. I think it is the offensive line mainly and the addition of McNiel. But there is a reason his numbers took such a jump from 2005-2006 and it was not LT. LT has performed at a extremly high level in any and all difficult situations before. Now somthing clicked last year with the supporting cast and I see whatever that was continuing. I think we are in a window of his best years yet.
This point is well taken on the issue of exit value. And to be honest it is part of what I am thinking about in evaluating his worth at this point of time. However thinking too far ahead especialy with elite players such as LT can really work against you. Look at how people prematurly dumped Marvin Harrison thinking about an exit strategy only to have Martin continue to perform at such a high level many years after they decided to get out before Marvin hit that decline. Same thing with Curtis Martin. I believe there are other examples. I think LT is coming into his most productive years from 2006-2008 possibly longer than that and it would be a mistake to sell him short based off of a exit strategy instead of keeping him and probobly selling him for similar value later on.
TDs are somthing that is a bit hard to predict. However as I said above I think somthing clicked in the offense around LT last year and this high level of TDs is likely to continue with the supporting cast now in place around him. Also having Norv Turner in charge will lead to LT being the 1st 2nd and 3rd option in goal to go situations based off of Turners history with RBs.TDs by year for LT:2001 102002 152003 172004 182005 202006 31As you notice LT has been increasing his TD every year. I think it is because of the team improving around him with each season that has led to this. So while I do not see him improving on his TD total from 2006 I also do not see it falling back lower than 2005 level when one considers the steady improvement and that improvement being likely to continue as the offense around him (as well as the defense) continues to improve.Thanks for the thoughtful discussion SSOG and your points do not fall on deaf ears with me. I just have a different perspective. And LT is a very unique player that causes a lot of normal conventions that would apply to most players to be reconsidered because of his increadibly unique talent and ability. I think he is clearly a lock for the HOF when all is said and done and the best RB I have ever seen. Including sweetness.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mike
Footballguy
So why are you trying to trade him?
Biabreakable
Footballguy
So why are you trying to trade him?
I am not really. Just exploring scenarios where it might be worthwhile but not finding any.It is that quiet time of the offseason with little to do that can become dangerous and lead to mismanaging my teams.
Mike
Footballguy
SSOG
Moderator
Well, whether you think it or not, there is a history of RBs losing effectiveness as their workload mounts. It's worth noting that the only two RBs to score 20+ TDs after age thirty were Priest Holmes and John Riggins- two guys who weren't used heavily early in their careers. Look at the list of RBs who have scored 250+ points after age 30- Riggins, Holmes, Barber and Charlie Garner show up. Outside of Holmes, none was widely regarded as a real fantasy stud, but all were very lightly used early in their career. Of the dozens of fantasy stud RBs, the only three that continued to produce in their thirties were Payton, Curtis Martin, and the enigmatic Corey Dillon, who declined heavily due to his career workload, then made it to NE and saw a one-year revival, then returned to his regularly scheduled decline.There are lots of RBs who were lightly used until they got older, and those RBs tended to remain productive longer than their peers, which indicates that workload, not age, is the deciding factor in the decline of RBs. If you have trouble believing that Tomlinson's carries in 2002 might affect him today, then I have a question for you. Have you ever seen Earl Campbell since he retired from football? Do you still have trouble believing that carries an RB had 5, 10, or even 20 years ago can still have an effect on an RB? Do you remember what drove Marshall Faulk out of football? Eventually, all those collisions just wore out all the cartilege in his knees. I mean, each football hit is a mini-trainwreck. Those massive collisions add up. If everyone can accept the fact that a 370-carry season will make an RB more likely to decline the next season, then why is it so hard to believe that 1000 carries over a 3-year span can do the same thing?CalBear said:
To be honest, this is why people draft so many RBs- their careers are so short that they can really only usually expect 4-5 years of production once they hit their prime. While a WR might last you for 10 years, you have to constantly turn over your RBs.Biabreakable said:
The point isn't that Tomlinson is better than the RBs who have done it... the point is that a lot of other RBs were better, too, and they never did it. Marshall Faulk was better than any of those guys except for Sweetness, and he never scored 250 past 30. Emmitt Smith was better than any of those guys except for Sweetness, and he never scored 250 past 30. Barry Sanders never did it, Terrell Davis never did it, Eric Dickerson never did it, Earl Campbell never did it, Thurman Thomas never did it, O.J. Simpson never did it. These are all stud RBs, potential HoFers, guys who entire generations of RBs have been compared to (and will continue to be compared to). Tomlinson could be in the same class, but why would he succeed where all but Sweetness have failed?I think the big problem here is that everyone lacks perspective here. We're in the middle of a truly amazing career, and all we can see is the career in front of us. We've forgotten that once upon a time we all felt exactly the same way about Holmes, Faulk, Davis, Edge James, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith, Eric Dickerson, Thurman Thomas, etc... and we've forgotten how all of that turned out, too. Tomlinson is not the first superduperuberstud RB in fantasy history... and in all instances, a Superduperuberstud has just fallen off the face of the planet with no warning, while they were still in their prime. From what I remember, Holmes, Davis, Faulk, Sanders, and Smith all fell off the cliff in a season where they were considered the consensus #1 overall pick in dynasty leagues. The lesson that I take from that is that in dynasty, with superstuds, we overrate past performance and don't pay enough attention to workload.
dparker713
Footballguy
Its simple. Over the past several seasons there has been a fairly wide gap between the truly elite RBs and the rest of the good ones (normally between RB3 and 4) They're the most valueable commodity in FF. Unless you've got an extremely large starting roster, I don't see how you can justify trading LT for someone that has little chance of finishing in the elite range. So basically, any trade offer that doesnt start with SJax or LJ is probably a non-starter.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
For an average RB it is only reasonable to expect 3 years of them performing at a RB1 level. LT has done it for his 1st 6 years in the league allready. I think it is pretty clear that he is not an average RB.
Of your examples each player had a bit different circumstances that had an effect on the drop of thier performance after age 28.Marshall Faulk had seasons shortened by injury.Terrell Davis only had 4 years before injury robbed him of continuing his career at the same level.Eric Dickerson also had injury issues.Barry Sanders unexpectedly retired at age 30 after another top 10 season. I expect he would have played at a high level beyond age 29 if he had not retired.Priest Holmes still had top 12 season at age 31Edge is not done yet. I think poor Cardinals Oline had more to do with last year than his age or wear and tear however.Curtis Martin was RB 4 at age 31Walter Peyton was RB 5 at age 32Emmit Smith RB 5 at age 30 but still continued to be a RB 2 for 3 of the next 5 years on some bad teams.Thurman Thomas was RB 11 at age 30 then declined.Tiki Barber age 29-31 was RB 2, 4 and 7 in those respective years. Age 29 definitly seems to be a common cutoff for elite RB performers. It was not until very recently that any RB performed at a top level at age 30 or beyond.With the advances in medicine it is becoming clear that RB careers can last longer at thier peak performance levels when one looks at recent examples of Tiki Barber Curtis Martin Warrick Dunn Priest Holmes.Then there is LT.Going over this historical data again I really do not find much reason for concern. In most cases with these RB it is not workload or age that causes them to fall off it is injury. And I would have to say that age is more of a factor than workload until proven otherwise. Eddie George is probobly the best counter example of that but George and Earl Campbell were different types of RBs than most of these others and took a lot more punishment with every carry they had than many of these more shifty RBs ever did/do.LT will be 30 years old for the 2009 season. I have no issue with rolling with him until then or even possibly 2010-2011 based on current medicine and the performance of Barber, Martin and Holmes recently who I think LT is better than all of them were. and this does matter. Because a slowing down LT is still going to be more talented than these guys were and that just make him a good player instead of a great player as he gets older. So yeah the point does matter about how good LT is. Because even a aged LT may have more talent than Curtis Martin had in his prime. No disrespect to Martin intended here at all. But Martins game was always about toughness, heart and work ethic. Things that LT has plenty of as well.BTW that is 3 seasons of play from now that LT will be 30. If you hold to the historic trends of cutoff being 29 then LT should be fine for this season and next at least but cause for concern in 3rd season when he is 30. So plan exit strategy accordingly. But I think that if anyone can buck the trend or is likely to do so it is LT. Much like Walter did before him.
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear
Footballguy
A 370-carry season doesn't make a RB more likely to decline the next season, any more than a 10-TD or a 1500-yard or a top-10 fantasy season does. If you measure any statistical population with performance significantly above the mean, you will see a decline in year N+1; that's simple regression to the mean, and it doesn't have predictive value for an individual player in a specific year. (For example, LT scored almost 50 more fantasy points in 2003 after getting 372 carries in 2002).
Pictus Cat
Footballguy
I voted yes. In my own case I have (Keep 3, .75 PPR, TD 7)
SJax
Bush
Benson
McAllister
Fitz
Holt
RMoss
Now, I could go after LT2, or I can go after draft picks. I think it would take SJax, Benson, Holt/Moss. I don't think I would offer more. My team is greater if I can get some good picks without LT2.
SJax
Bush
Benson
McAllister
Fitz
Holt
RMoss
Now, I could go after LT2, or I can go after draft picks. I think it would take SJax, Benson, Holt/Moss. I don't think I would offer more. My team is greater if I can get some good picks without LT2.
SSOG
Moderator
Shouldn't this be an argument *AGAINST* Tomlinson? I mean, we all agree that he's not going to be an RB1 forever, right? He's going to stop being a stud SOMETIME, right? Doesn't the fact that he's already bucked the odds for so long make it less likely that he will continue for so long still.
I'm arguing use over age here, so Holmes doesn't belong on the list (he was very lightly used early in his career, and never had as many carries in his entire career as Tomlinson has already), and neither does Tiki Barber. Faulk, Davis, and Dickerson all got injured, and I'm contending that overuse leads to injury as well as reduced effectiveness, so that's three points in my favor, I would think. Barry Sanders retired and probably would have continued to produce into his 30s (although, as I'm saying, you never know), but who's to say that he didn't retire because of the daily grind of being an NFL RB (both Tiki Barber and Ricky Williams listed getting hit so much as a reason for retirement while they still had their health). For whatever reason, Edge fell off a freaking cliff last year- his ypc dropped so precipitously that it's a little strange to blame it all on Arizona, especially since J.J. Arrington ran for a nearly identical ypc the year before Edge got there- you'd think a back as talented as Edge could manage more than .1 ypc more than J.J. Arrington got. I really think that of those on the list, only CuMart and Sweetness are examples of bucking the age/workload trend and continuing to produce.
Again, I'm arguing workload, not age, so Barber, Dunn, and Holmes aren't exactly the best comparisons here.
It does make a RB more likely to decline the next season, more so than simple regression to the mean. Compare 300+ point RBs with <370 carries to 300+ point RBs with >370 carries and see which group regresses more. See which group winds up missing more games to injury. See which group sees a more precipitous drop in ypc. Compare RBs who 400 total touches but under 370 carries to RBs with 400 total touches but over 370 carries and see which group declines more. There is definitely a correlation between overuse in one season and decline (in the form of precipitous drop in ypc or injury) the following season.Or you could just check out this article and this article.
CalBear
Footballguy
Those articles have lots of numbers, but they don't speak to the question. Here's one great quote:
They leave out "...or Ladanian Tomlinson, or Walter Payton, or Emmitt Smith." In fact, of the 24 seasons they are studying, eight of them were followed by similarly good seasons, and one of them was followed by Rasta's retirement. So the sample size is vanishingly small, and there are a whole lot of counterexamples to the general trend.Is Tomlinson a better analogy to Eric Dickerson, or John Riggins? What do you think?
And neither article speaks at all to the question of long-term workload.
Banger
Footballguy
SS-I respect your opinion and you usually come to the party with sound statistical arguments but at the end of there are certain players that you can throw out the stats. If LT stays healthy there's a good chance that he re-writes the record book for all RB's. He keeps himself in fantastic shape, has taken extra time his entire career to get massages/whirlpool bath's/etc. to address all the bumps/bruises that tend to have a cumulative effect, he's been healthy, he's very elusive, and he's on the top scoring offense with tremendous surrounding talent (top O-line) that are nearly all signed long term.
At some point he will slow down but he certainly didn't show it last year and he's not an Eddie George type back where one day the wheels will just fall off. Guys like LT come along once every 20 years, you trade for players like him, you don't trade them.
SSOG
Moderator
All trends will have counterexamples, but the trend still exists.As for long-term workload... as I said, if you establish that 370 carries over one year can affect an RB the following year, why is it so hard to then extend that out and say that 1000 carries over 3 years can do the same thing?
I don't think there are ever players where you can throw out the stats. Some players might buck the odds, but you can't just throw out the stats. Obviously Tomlinson is a sublime talent, but he's still going to get affected by his workload just like every RB. It might take more carries to wear him down, or it might take more years to wear him down, but sooner or later, everyone succumbs to age and workload. Comparing Tomlinson to other RBs who "had a good chance to rewrite the record book" or who "you could throw out the stats" for gives us a better idea of what we can expect from Tomlinson himself.
Banger
Footballguy
Of course he's going to age and slow down at some point but he hasn't come close to showing it yet (how many records did he break last year?) and dealing him because he "should" slow down based on stats from guys that were different types of runners, with different surrounding talent, etc. there's a good chance that you will miss out on unheard of stats over the next few years. It's tough to argue that there is a RB in the entire NFL with a better situation than he is in both in the short term and long term. He's on an offense that runs the ball, has a good young QB, great O-line (last year was the 1st time in his career where he had an even average line) very good defense and all the major Charger pieces are signed over the next few years. Now add his talent to that situation and you have records being smashed. I don't think he will break the record again last year but then again I didn't expect it last year. Imagine Barry Sanders on a team with a good line, good QB, good surrounding cast and good defense and you have LT.
Last edited by a moderator:
AnonymousBob
Footballguy
SSOG, I understand how exit value works and I generally agree with that thought process. With a player of Tomlinson's caliber I would have to take a look at the rest of my team. If I had few holes on my roster and was poised to win it all I would say to hell with five years down the line, I'm going to grab the next couple championships then deal with things when he falls off. If my team was a wasteland outside of LT, I would realize one player alone would not win me a championship and pawn him off.
In redrafts, the price for LT should be so extreme few, if any, teams should be able to afford it. In dynasties, SJax + Evans would be mighty tempting. Rud + Roy would not begin to come close.
In redrafts, the price for LT should be so extreme few, if any, teams should be able to afford it. In dynasties, SJax + Evans would be mighty tempting. Rud + Roy would not begin to come close.
CalBear
Footballguy
If you want to do that study, do it, but don't claim it as truth when the study hasn't been done. My hypothesis is that if you control for age, you will not find any significant effect from long-term workload on future productivity. There are plenty of anecdotal examples (already raised in this thread). And you've brought up Priest Holmes a number of times in this thread; Holmes had a light early workload, and got injured just after turning 31 and was never effective again. He also had a season-ending injury at age 29, that just happened to occur in game 14 so his stats for the year still were good. He's another counter-example to your hypothesis; his light early workload didn't keep him from breaking down.Tomlinson is not a trend; he is a person. I don't think, aside from the usual injury risk, that there's any reason to believe he can't outperform Curtis Martin at age 31.
Gr00vus
Footballguy
I wouldn't do that deal. At this point you only trade LaDainian if you're basically getting two round 1 or very early round 2 (redraft) talents back.
That said I don't think LaDainain matches last year's numbers. 1) Last year's numbers were ridiculous even for LaDainain 2) I really think they'll work on spreading the touches around and get more people a involved bit more this year on offense. I especially think they'll utilize Turner a bit more this year since this is the last year they'll have him. This in order to save wear and tear on LaDainian, keep him more fresh through the season and into the playoffs and possibly extend/enhance his longevity looking toward future years.
That said, barring injury, you can't expect anything less than the #3 overall scorer from him. There's nobody else in fantasy football you can say that about. That's why you don't trade him unless you're getting a major payday.
That said I don't think LaDainain matches last year's numbers. 1) Last year's numbers were ridiculous even for LaDainain 2) I really think they'll work on spreading the touches around and get more people a involved bit more this year on offense. I especially think they'll utilize Turner a bit more this year since this is the last year they'll have him. This in order to save wear and tear on LaDainian, keep him more fresh through the season and into the playoffs and possibly extend/enhance his longevity looking toward future years.
That said, barring injury, you can't expect anything less than the #3 overall scorer from him. There's nobody else in fantasy football you can say that about. That's why you don't trade him unless you're getting a major payday.
JayMan
Footballguy
I havn't read the second article... but I can say that the first one is one of the worst article posted I've read trying to 'prove' something statistically... First test: sample size is very small - 60 observations in over a 25 year period;
The null and alternate hypothesis are not set initially - impossible to reject the hypothesis (and even more impossible to 'prove' anything - as it is always the case with statistical analysis);
It leaves out the 'exception' seasons of Ladainian Tomlinson, Walter Payton, Eric Dickerson and Emmith Smith - why?;
The Pearson colleration factors of -.12 and -.17 and .06 actually show a less than 1% relation between the variables! The exact opposite that the writer is trying to 'prove' and he stills tries to add this: 'The reaction of most statisticians at this point would be that these correlations are extremely small. This is simply a fact of life when talking about the NFL, where so many factors contribute to a player or team’s performance — many of them intangible — that no one factor will have a particularly large impact on its own.' ?
... showing that it's impossible to isolate the factor he wants to point out... and still draws conclusons on it?I'm not saying that there is a correlation or not between age/FFpts... workload/FFpts... but to use that particular article to say it's 'proven' is simply wrong
Holy Schneikes
Footballguy
So who wins in a fight, Ditka or Tomlinson?
dparker713
Footballguy
You may only be talking about dynasty, but thats not what the OP asked.
TheLastDispatch
Footballguy
Is it a mini Ditka or a full size Ditka?
SSOG
Moderator
The topic says "debate over LTs value", and I'm doing just that. I made it clear in my first post on this topic that I was talking dynasty.
Similar threads
