Good players who almost NEVER get hurt (1 Viewer)

[Raider Nation]

I'm sick of having guys on my roster on whom you cannot depend when you're trying to win a fantasy title. This year, I want to concentrate on drafting players who'll be there to answer the bell for you.

I looked for players on profootballreference.com who had these three factors going for them:

- At least 3 years of being a full-time starter.

- No more than 1 missed game per season (on average) DUE TO INJURY over the last 3-5 years. In fact, most of the guys on this list averaged only 1 missed game per every 2 years!

- They simply had to be an "above average" player. I want to target solid players you can take round after round deep into your draft and feel confident that they'll suit up 16 games for you.

Using the above criteria, and researching at PFR.com, the list is below:

Tom Brady

Jake Delhomme

Brett Favre

Trent Green

Matt Hasselbeck

Peyton Manning

Jake Plummer

Shaun Alexander

Tiki Barber

Rudi Johnson

Jamal Lewis

Clinton Portis

LaDainian Tomlinson

Alge Crumpler

Antonio Gates

Tony Gonzalez

Randy McMichael

Jason Witten

Chris Chambers

Donald Driver

Marvin Harrison

Torry Holt

Chad Johnson

Eddie Kennison

Randy Moss

Santana Moss

Hines Ward

That's it. From what I can tell, those are the only 27 players who met the criteria completely. Notice anything about those names? I was only looking for "above average" players who rarely got hurt, but almost to a man, they are all superstars. So much for taking productive, injury-free players deep into my draft. I'm gonna need 20 picks in the first five rounds to get most of these guys. I guess I really didn't need to do two hours of research to ascertain that a big part of being successful in the NFL is actually staying on the field.

There are several players who were VERY close to making the list, but I simply could not include them for one reason or another. Here they are, with commentary:

All of the following players met the "games played" standard, but.......

- Curtis Martin, Jimmy Smith, Rod Smith, Amani Toomer

I'm afraid that each of these players have hit the wall. Upside is limited.

- Derrick Mason & Mushin Muhammed

Both will be on the field every week, but neither is in a great situation.

- Laveranues Coles, Keyshawn Johnson, Eric Moulds

I just can't get the warm fuzzies about ANY of these guys.

- Drew Bledsoe & Aaron Brooks

I cannot in good conscience recommend either, though they both are rarely hurt.

- Ashley Lelie

I suppose he qualifies as "above average," but he doesn't score enough.

- David Carr

Has not been above average in the past, but he's the breakout player of 2006.

Did I miss anyone???

 

[redman]

Did I miss anyone???

Fred Taylor.

 

[cracKer]

Michael Strahan played in 137 consecutive games before missing half of 2004 with a torn pec.

 

[Raider Nation]

Michael Strahan played in 137 consecutive games before missing half of 2004 with a torn pec.

Do people still play in IDP leagues?

 

[diesel7982]

Im having a hard time rationalizing this: - No more than 1 missed game per season (on average) DUE TO INJURY over the last 3-5 years. In fact, most of the guys on this list averaged only 1 missed game per every 2 years!

And this: Jamal Lewis

 

[diesel7982]

Another small criticism

Drew Bledsoe & Aaron Brooks

I cannot in good conscience recommend either, though they both are rarely hurt.

Why cant you recommend either of these guys? Bledsoe especially? What did Matt Hasselbeck or Jake Delhomme do last year that Bledsoe didnt? Especially considering that he'll have TO this season.

 

[Raider Nation]

Im having a hard time rationalizing this: - No more than 1 missed game per season (on average) DUE TO INJURY over the last 3-5 years. In fact, most of the guys on this list averaged only 1 missed game per every 2 years!

And this: Jamal Lewis

Want to know the funny part? I originally had (if you can believe that) in parenthesis after listing Lewis. Here it is:
+--------------------------+-------------------------+ | Rushing | Receiving |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Att Yards Y/A TD | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 2000 bal | 16 | 309 1364 4.4 6 | 27 296 11.0 0 || 2002 bal | 16 | 308 1327 4.3 6 | 47 442 9.4 1 || 2003 bal | 16 | 387 2066 5.3 14 | 26 205 7.9 0 || 2004 bal | 12 | 235 1006 4.3 7 | 10 116 11.6 0 || 2005 bal | 15 | 269 906 3.4 3 | 32 191 6.0 1 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 75 | 1508 6669 4.4 36 | 142 1250 8.8 2 |The 3-5 years means it can be as little as 3, or as many as 5.In the last four years, Jamal has missed about 1 game per year.

 

[Raider Nation]

Another small criticism

Drew Bledsoe & Aaron Brooks

I cannot in good conscience recommend either, though they both are rarely hurt.

Why cant you recommend either of these guys? Bledsoe especially? What did Matt Hasselbeck or Jake Delhomme do last year that Bledsoe didnt? Especially considering that he'll have TO this season.

Just my personal feeling, nothing more. Bledsoe now has Owens, and Brooks (if he indeed starts) has Moss, and I still can't stand either of them. But you're probably right.

 

[radballs.]

This doesn't factor in PPG which is a much more important indicator imo. I'd rather have someone who is 1.5*X*FP when healthy and then I can plug in a replacement (if that makes any sense). Using your list I am chopping off a potentially explosive part of the available players just because of randomn past health or injuries. Thanks for putting the list together though.

 

[Bri]

Randy McMichael

useless as he might as well be hurt after week 5 or 6 every year. At least you'd know to put a backup TE in your lineup

 

[Raider Nation]

This doesn't factor in PPG which is a much more important indicator imo. I'd rather have someone who is 1.5FP*X when healthy and then I can plug in a replacement (if that makes any sense). Using your list I am chopping off a potentially explosive part of the available players just because of randomn past health or injuries. Thanks for putting the list together though.

Agreed. It also doesn't take into account teams who have wrapped up their playoff seeding playing their guys only 1 quarter or so. Manning and Harrison play for 10 snaps, and it's in the books as a "game played." Lots of tweaking to be done, I know. I'm looking to draft players who have a habit of staying healthy, combined with QBs & WRs on a team which also has a bad defense, so they have to throw a lot, and the toughest part, forecasting which players won't be sitting in the final couple of weeks. That last one isn't TERRIBLY important, however. I'm not going to pass up Harrison or Wayne for a lesser player simply because the lesser player is on a worse team. It's just something I try to keep in mind just in case all other factors are equal.

I definitely overanalyze things on draft day. I try to leave no stone unturned.

 

[Raider Nation]

Randy McMichael

useless as he might as well be hurt after week 5 or 6 every year. At least you'd know to put a backup TE in your lineup

Culpepper down?

 

[radballs.]

This doesn't factor in PPG which is a much more important indicator imo. I'd rather have someone who is 1.5FP*X when healthy and then I can plug in a replacement (if that makes any sense). Using your list I am chopping off a potentially explosive part of the available players just because of randomn past health or injuries. Thanks for putting the list together though.

Agreed. It also doesn't take into account teams who have wrapped up their playoff seeding playing their guys only 1 quarter or so. Manning and Harrison play for 10 snaps, and it's in the books as a "game played." Lots of tweaking to be done, I know. I'm looking to draft players who have a habit of staying healthy, combined with QBs & WRs on a team which also has a bad defense, so they have to throw a lot, and the toughest part, forecasting which players won't be sitting in the final couple of weeks. That last one isn't TERRIBLY important, however. I'm not going to pass up Harrison or Wayne for a lesser player simply because the lesser player is on a worse team. It's just something I try to keep in mind just in case all other factors are equal.

I definitely overanalyze things on draft day. I try to leave no stone unturned.

RN,Not saying that this isn't valuable research, but like the mutual fund companies in small print say historical results are not necessarily indicative of future performance, the same might apply. Are certain people or players truly injury prone? Is there some sort of predictive variable that we can stamp on certain players? Maybe there is, but predicting injuries in future years is very difficult to do.

This falls under risk analysis which is exactly what you're doing. This is a great discussion to get going once again. I usually tend to think that players who have a relatively poor injury history are decent bargains because of it come draft day. But, that's just me.

 

[Raider Nation]

This doesn't factor in PPG which is a much more important indicator imo. I'd rather have someone who is 1.5FP*X when healthy and then I can plug in a replacement (if that makes any sense). Using your list I am chopping off a potentially explosive part of the available players just because of randomn past health or injuries. Thanks for putting the list together though.

Agreed. It also doesn't take into account teams who have wrapped up their playoff seeding playing their guys only 1 quarter or so. Manning and Harrison play for 10 snaps, and it's in the books as a "game played." Lots of tweaking to be done, I know. I'm looking to draft players who have a habit of staying healthy, combined with QBs & WRs on a team which also has a bad defense, so they have to throw a lot, and the toughest part, forecasting which players won't be sitting in the final couple of weeks. That last one isn't TERRIBLY important, however. I'm not going to pass up Harrison or Wayne for a lesser player simply because the lesser player is on a worse team. It's just something I try to keep in mind just in case all other factors are equal.

I definitely overanalyze things on draft day. I try to leave no stone unturned.

RN,Not saying that this isn't valuable research, but like the mutual fund companies in small print say historical results are not necessarily indicative of future performance, the same might apply. Are certain people or players truly injury prone?

I understand your point. Here is mine. Players who've been injury-prone in the past might very well not get hurt again. But players who rarely get hurt would seem more likely to continue that pattern. At least they have earned my confidence.

 

[radballs.]

This doesn't factor in PPG which is a much more important indicator imo. I'd rather have someone who is 1.5FP*X when healthy and then I can plug in a replacement (if that makes any sense). Using your list I am chopping off a potentially explosive part of the available players just because of randomn past health or injuries. Thanks for putting the list together though.

Agreed. It also doesn't take into account teams who have wrapped up their playoff seeding playing their guys only 1 quarter or so. Manning and Harrison play for 10 snaps, and it's in the books as a "game played." Lots of tweaking to be done, I know. I'm looking to draft players who have a habit of staying healthy, combined with QBs & WRs on a team which also has a bad defense, so they have to throw a lot, and the toughest part, forecasting which players won't be sitting in the final couple of weeks. That last one isn't TERRIBLY important, however. I'm not going to pass up Harrison or Wayne for a lesser player simply because the lesser player is on a worse team. It's just something I try to keep in mind just in case all other factors are equal.

I definitely overanalyze things on draft day. I try to leave no stone unturned.

RN,Not saying that this isn't valuable research, but like the mutual fund companies in small print say historical results are not necessarily indicative of future performance, the same might apply. Are certain people or players truly injury prone?

I understand your point. Here is mine. Players who've been injury-prone in the past might very well not get hurt again. But players who rarely get hurt would seem more likely to continue that pattern. At least they have earned my confidence.

Point taken and I agree to a certain extent. On a side note, on Encore right now Halloween II is just getting under way. Trying to figure out if Jamie had work done or not. Man, that Michael Myers just doesn't quit does he. He'd make the all no-injury team for sure.

 

[Raider Nation]

This doesn't factor in PPG which is a much more important indicator imo. I'd rather have someone who is 1.5FP*X when healthy and then I can plug in a replacement (if that makes any sense). Using your list I am chopping off a potentially explosive part of the available players just because of randomn past health or injuries. Thanks for putting the list together though.

Agreed. It also doesn't take into account teams who have wrapped up their playoff seeding playing their guys only 1 quarter or so. Manning and Harrison play for 10 snaps, and it's in the books as a "game played." Lots of tweaking to be done, I know. I'm looking to draft players who have a habit of staying healthy, combined with QBs & WRs on a team which also has a bad defense, so they have to throw a lot, and the toughest part, forecasting which players won't be sitting in the final couple of weeks. That last one isn't TERRIBLY important, however. I'm not going to pass up Harrison or Wayne for a lesser player simply because the lesser player is on a worse team. It's just something I try to keep in mind just in case all other factors are equal.

I definitely overanalyze things on draft day. I try to leave no stone unturned.

RN,Not saying that this isn't valuable research, but like the mutual fund companies in small print say historical results are not necessarily indicative of future performance, the same might apply. Are certain people or players truly injury prone?

I understand your point. Here is mine. Players who've been injury-prone in the past might very well not get hurt again. But players who rarely get hurt would seem more likely to continue that pattern. At least they have earned my confidence.

Point taken and I agree to a certain extent. On a side note, on Encore right now Halloween II is just getting under way. Trying to figure out if Jamie had work done or not. Man, that Michael Myers just doesn't quit does he. He'd make the all no-injury team for sure.

Her ample gifts were on display in all their glory in "Trading Places." Ahem.... back to the topic.

 

[loqutis]

I have a problem with Randy Moss on the list. The guy pretty much missed half of last year and half of 2004. Just because he suits up and run a couple decoy patterns doesn't mean he wasn't worthless to his owner

 

[The Shizzle]

Bit of advice

If your only counting injuries, you should also consider "throw away games" at the end of the year. When the team clinches and the starters only play a half or so. Typically. it is right around playoff time.

Some names that come to mind are: Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Edge (maybe not anymore).

The last few years, when they clinch, these guys don;t play that much at all, and if they do, there points are huge so depending on them weeks 15-17 is a risky move.

It also seems as if LaDainian has had a reoccurring injury late in the season the past few years. These guys are bonafide studs, but when the end of the season rools around they are hard to count on the help you win the championship in your league.

An owner is my league has LT and Manning and he wins the points alot but come playoff time, he is watching not playing.

Similar to Manning every year!!!

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Okay, so 27 players in the NFL have been pretty lucky over the past three years. I don't see how that helps me this year.

Case in point: Clinton Portis. If you do a search from 3 years ago, you'll see that he was considered highly injury-prone by people on these boards. Now he's being highlighted as an ironman.

I will grant that there are some players who are intrinsically less likely to be injured than others (Manning vs. Vick, for example). But all it takes is for one defensive lineman to roll the wrong way and Manning = Carson Palmer.

 

[Maroney=Speed]

This is one rough freaking game.

 

[Bri]

I have a problem with Randy Moss on the list. The guy pretty much missed half of last year and half of 2004. Just because he suits up and run a couple decoy patterns doesn't mean he wasn't worthless to his owner

I agreeRN you gotta find a way to tweak this a little bit

 

[Velcro]

I just don't get your logic. You searched for specific criteria, then judgmentally threw out those you feel aren't good enough and are surprised that the only ones left are superstars?

To drag this out further, you specified "above average". I don't know how you defined it, but in a 16 round draft "above average" would seem to apply to the 1st 8 rounds, or 7 rounds if the 8th represents the "average". (I know this isn't a true correlation since owners may draft sleepers with high potential before the known commodity and some positions get drafted faster than others.) Further expanding your search criteria and then judgmentally eliminating players with limited upside (in your opinion) or in bad situations obviously shrinks the remaining pool to a chosen few.

One last point - removing players from the results due to subjective criteria would seem to be contrary to your inital purpose - to find healthy players that you can rely on.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Even though Randy Moss has missed few games, he has been limited by injury in many over the last 2 years, which is almost worse than outright missing the game, because you are likely starting him when he is not capable of putting up his usual numbers.

 

[Raider Nation]

Bit of advice

If your only counting injuries, you should also consider "throw away games" at the end of the year. When the team clinches and the starters only play a half or so. Typically. it is right around playoff time.

Some names that come to mind are: Peyton Manning, Marvin Harrison, Edge (maybe not anymore).

The last few years, when they clinch, these guys don;t play that much at all, and if they do, there points are huge so depending on them weeks 15-17 is a risky move.

It also seems as if LaDainian has had a reoccurring injury late in the season the past few years. These guys are bonafide studs, but when the end of the season rools around they are hard to count on the help you win the championship in your league.

An owner is my league has LT and Manning and he wins the points alot but come playoff time, he is watching not playing.

Similar to Manning every year!!!

Please read post #11 in this thread. I addressed this issue.

 

[Raider Nation]

I have a problem with Randy Moss on the list. The guy pretty much missed half of last year and half of 2004. Just because he suits up and run a couple decoy patterns doesn't mean he wasn't worthless to his owner

I agreeRN you gotta find a way to tweak this a little bit

I give Moss credit for toughing it out when he was hurt. He easily could have taken the prima donna way out and not suited up at all when he was not even close to 100%.Still, here was there. Even if he wasn't his usual self.

+--------------------------+-------------------------+                 |          Rushing         |        Receiving        |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Att  Yards    Y/A   TD |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+| 1998 min |  16 |     1      4    4.0    0 |    69   1313  19.0   17 || 1999 min |  16 |     4     43   10.8    0 |    80   1413  17.7   11 || 2000 min |  16 |     3      5    1.7    0 |    77   1437  18.7   15 || 2001 min |  16 |     3     38   12.7    0 |    82   1233  15.0   10 || 2002 min |  16 |     6     51    8.5    0 |   106   1347  12.7    7 || 2003 min |  16 |     6     18    3.0    0 |   111   1632  14.7   17 || 2004 min |  13 |     0      0    0.0    0 |    49    767  15.7   13 || 2005 oak |  16 |     0      0    0.0    0 |    60   1005  16.8    8 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   | 125 |    23    159    6.9    0 |   634  10147  16.0   98 |+----------+-----+--------------------------+-------------------------+

 

[Raider Nation]

I just don't get your logic. You searched for specific criteria, then judgmentally threw out those you feel aren't good enough and are surprised that the only ones left are superstars?

To drag this out further, you specified "above average". I don't know how you defined it, but in a 16 round draft "above average" would seem to apply to the 1st 8 rounds, or 7 rounds if the 8th represents the "average". (I know this isn't a true correlation since owners may draft sleepers with high potential before the known commodity and some positions get drafted faster than others.) Further expanding your search criteria and then judgmentally eliminating players with limited upside (in your opinion) or in bad situations obviously shrinks the remaining pool to a chosen few.

One last point - removing players from the results due to subjective criteria would seem to be contrary to your inital purpose - to find healthy players that you can rely on.

Most of this is fair criticism. However, I did specifically say that "the following players met the games played standard," but I didn't feel good about listing them with the others for a myriad of reasons. I didn't want the findings of the research to be completely black and white. I had to leave a grey area, because after all, I want to apply this information to draft day. Other than Brooks and Bledsoe, whom I agree are arguable, do you REALLY want to have to count on any of those other players? If you get them at a bargain -- that's another matter.In short, most of it was hard and fast. Some was subjective. Thanks for writing.

 

[Raider Nation]

This is one rough freaking game.

Yeah. I'm not trying to split the atom here, fellas. I knew there would be issues with the initial post, and that's fine. But the bottom line is that on draft day, I want to be armed with information regarding which players will be on the field for you.Again, unfortunately, most of them will be gone in the first 3-4 rounds.

I had too many players on the shelf last year. I'm taking "safer" players this year.

 

[The Mechanic]

This is one rough freaking game.

Yeah. I'm not trying to split the atom here, fellas. I knew there would be issues with the initial post, and that's fine. But the bottom line is that on draft day, I want to be armed with information regarding which players will be on the field for you.Again, unfortunately, most of them will be gone in the first 3-4 rounds.

I had too many players on the shelf last year. I'm taking "safer" players this year.

Thanks for the post. I will print and file this and read it again near draft day. This type of info can help to decide who to pick if you are pondering a coulpe of players at the same time. Thanks for the info.

 

[Harpua]

I just don't get your logic. You searched for specific criteria, then judgmentally threw out those you feel aren't good enough and are surprised that the only ones left are superstars?

To drag this out further, you specified "above average". I don't know how you defined it, but in a 16 round draft "above average" would seem to apply to the 1st 8 rounds, or 7 rounds if the 8th represents the "average". (I know this isn't a true correlation since owners may draft sleepers with high potential before the known commodity and some positions get drafted faster than others.) Further expanding your search criteria and then judgmentally eliminating players with limited upside (in your opinion) or in bad situations obviously shrinks the remaining pool to a chosen few.

One last point - removing players from the results due to subjective criteria would seem to be contrary to your inital purpose - to find healthy players that you can rely on.

Most of this is fair criticism. However, I did specifically say that "the following players met the games played standard," but I didn't feel good about listing them with the others for a myriad of reasons. I didn't want the findings of the research to be completely black and white. I had to leave a grey area, because after all, I want to apply this information to draft day. Other than Brooks and Bledsoe, whom I agree are arguable, do you REALLY want to have to count on any of those other players? If you get them at a bargain -- that's another matter.In short, most of it was hard and fast. Some was subjective. Thanks for writing.

but then you lament that all you have left are superstars. I think the value of this research is to highlight guys that have the perception of being a bad pick, but are not as bad as that perception. this is were you can get value in the middle and later rounds

 

[Warhogs]

Maybe it would be more useful to measure what percent of the time a player at each positions scores above average fantasy football points? A game missed of zero points means below that average. This would measure playing and performance. Of course it is easy to throw out the idea but I'm not going to do it. No time or ambition for that from me.

 

[cstu]

Another small criticism

Drew Bledsoe & Aaron Brooks

I cannot in good conscience recommend either, though they both are rarely hurt.

Why cant you recommend either of these guys? Bledsoe especially? What did Matt Hasselbeck or Jake Delhomme do last year that Bledsoe didnt? Especially considering that he'll have TO this season.

If he was the #6 QB with Glenn and Keyshawn, then he has to be a lock for the top 10 with Glenn and TO. I also think Bledsoe knows his HOF shot lies in how well he does this year and getting the Cowboys to the Super Bowl. He's as motivated to win as anyone in the game right now.

 

[Captain Spaulding]

Not only is health a big driver in fantasy players but NFL team wins as well. Health of starters during the season is probably the #1 contributor to a teams win/loss record more than talent differential. With parity in the NFL health plays the biggest factor. Patriots have been the only team in recent history to prove otherwise as they have been incredibly successful when key players have gone down to injuries.

 

[Velcro]

Other than Brooks and Bledsoe, whom I agree are arguable, do you REALLY want to have to count on any of those other players? If you get them at a bargain -- that's another matter.

In short, most of it was hard and fast. Some was subjective. Thanks for writing.

It depends on how you define "count on". Your stated goal was "I want to target solid players you can take round after round deep into your draft and feel confident that they'll suit up 16 games for you." I have to say that getting a Rod Smith or Mush deep in the draft could be a great pick and I wouldn't mind counting on them as my #3 WR. You did some "science" on these players, but you ignore the "art" of valuing the consistency and durability of Rod Smith vs the inconsistency but higher PPG of Steve Smith. Every one of the players you named will get drafted and could be tremendous values - depending on where they get drafted. Would you not draft Derrick Mason in the 12th round round because he's not in a great situation?Please understand that this is friendly banter and nothing personal. At it's heart, you take up a valiant cause in attempting to bring historical data into a value based drafting context. But ultimately, it's mostly art and luck. Cadillac Williams will be on your draft list, possibly higher than Curtis Martin, despite the fact that he fulfills none of your selected criteria.

 

[redman]

Okay, so 27 players in the NFL have been pretty lucky over the past three years. I don't see how that helps me this year.

Case in point: Clinton Portis. If you do a search from 3 years ago, you'll see that he was considered highly injury-prone by people on these boards. Now he's being highlighted as an ironman.

Ditto for Marshall Faulk circa ten years ago.