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!
Is this a mistake? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter nag'
- Start date
OK, so we throw out his worst... then its only fair to throw out the best too, right? Or are we only aloud to hand pick stats that work for YOUR arguement? 
Throwing out the best and worst the number would be 29 carries per TD.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
I'm getting every 33 carries.
wilked
Footballguy
I was averaging the averages, my bad.Point is, throwing out his best does not change the story...Where are you getting that? You would/should throw out the last 2 years (04 and 03). Leaving you with 666/23 for a TD every 28.95 carries.Throwing out the worst and the best, the number becomes TD every 26 carries.
jurb26
Footballguy
I think it does, but that really does not matter. I see 2 anomolies with Barber.1. His low TD per touch output in 2003.I was averaging the averages, my bad.Point is, throwing out his best does not change the story...Where are you getting that? You would/should throw out the last 2 years (04 and 03). Leaving you with 666/23 for a TD every 28.95 carries.Throwing out the worst and the best, the number becomes TD every 26 carries.
2. Him being a top 10 RB.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
TDs per carry (entire career):Holmes: 20Alexander: 21Tomlinson: 25Portis: 27Rudi Johnson: 28McCallister: 31Edge: 35Tiki Barber: 37Dillon: 38CMart: 39
Real Man of Genius
Footballguy
ifriends?
wilked
Footballguy
I agree on 1, but as for point #2:In 2000 he finished 13th among fantasy backs, in 2001 when he finished 14th, in 2002 when he finished 7th, in 2003 when he finished 15th and last year when he was the 2nd best fantasy back in football.I think it does, but that really does not matter. I see 2 anomolies with Barber.1. His low TD per touch output in 2003.I was averaging the averages, my bad.Point is, throwing out his best does not change the story...Where are you getting that? You would/should throw out the last 2 years (04 and 03). Leaving you with 666/23 for a TD every 28.95 carries.Throwing out the worst and the best, the number becomes TD every 26 carries.
2. Him being a top 10 RB.
13th, 14th, 7th, 15th, 2nd. 2 top 10 finishes in 5 years. 5 top 15 finishes in 5 years. How is a top 10 finish an anomoly?
jurb26
Footballguy
I don't see double digit TDs as the norm for Tiki. Notice that both years he finished in the top 10 he had double digit TDs. Maybe I should reword the 2nd point to double digit TD output.I agree on 1, but as for point #2:In 2000 he finished 13th among fantasy backs, in 2001 when he finished 14th, in 2002 when he finished 7th, in 2003 when he finished 15th and last year when he was the 2nd best fantasy back in football.I think it does, but that really does not matter. I see 2 anomolies with Barber.1. His low TD per touch output in 2003.I was averaging the averages, my bad.Point is, throwing out his best does not change the story...Where are you getting that? You would/should throw out the last 2 years (04 and 03). Leaving you with 666/23 for a TD every 28.95 carries.Throwing out the worst and the best, the number becomes TD every 26 carries.
2. Him being a top 10 RB.
13th, 14th, 7th, 15th, 2nd. 2 top 10 finishes in 5 years. 5 top 15 finishes in 5 years. How is a top 10 finish an anomoly?
Last edited by a moderator:
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Agree. The anomaly argument coulda worked two years ago. Now that he's done it again, you have to consider the posibility that he can be a top 10 back again. His TDs those years were 9, 4, 11, 3, and 15. You can see a trend developing.
wilked
Footballguy
You are using the word anomoly much too loosely.TD Totals last 5 years: 9, 4, 11, 3, 15I don't see double digit TDs as the norm for Tiki. Notice that both years he finished in the top 10 he had double digit TDs. Maybe I should reword the 2nd point to double digit TD output.I agree on 1, but as for point #2:In 2000 he finished 13th among fantasy backs, in 2001 when he finished 14th, in 2002 when he finished 7th, in 2003 when he finished 15th and last year when he was the 2nd best fantasy back in football.I think it does, but that really does not matter. I see 2 anomolies with Barber.1. His low TD per touch output in 2003.I was averaging the averages, my bad.Point is, throwing out his best does not change the story...Where are you getting that? You would/should throw out the last 2 years (04 and 03). Leaving you with 666/23 for a TD every 28.95 carries.Throwing out the worst and the best, the number becomes TD every 26 carries.
2. Him being a top 10 RB.
13th, 14th, 7th, 15th, 2nd. 2 top 10 finishes in 5 years. 5 top 15 finishes in 5 years. How is a top 10 finish an anomoly?
Double digits may not be likely this year, but they certainly wouldn't be considered an anomoly.
jurb26
Footballguy
The only trend I see is that his TDs are vastly inconsistent from year to year. We are not looking at a guy that has had steady growth by those numbers. It is unusual for Tiki to run the ball more than 300 times. It is also expected that he will not see as many GL touches. He has come out himself and said he would like a lesser workload. His coach likes GL specialists, they drafted one that fits that bill. Tiki had a career year in 2004. All of these reasons are pointing to a reduction from last year, yet everyone seems convinced that his output last year is the norm. Well, good luck drafting him as a top 10 RB then. I simply won't do it.
jurb26
Footballguy
Hint, Tiki has been in the NFL for 8 years, not 5.You are using the word anomoly much too loosely.TD Totals last 5 years: 9, 4, 11, 3, 15I don't see double digit TDs as the norm for Tiki. Notice that both years he finished in the top 10 he had double digit TDs. Maybe I should reword the 2nd point to double digit TD output.I agree on 1, but as for point #2:In 2000 he finished 13th among fantasy backs, in 2001 when he finished 14th, in 2002 when he finished 7th, in 2003 when he finished 15th and last year when he was the 2nd best fantasy back in football.I think it does, but that really does not matter. I see 2 anomolies with Barber.1. His low TD per touch output in 2003.I was averaging the averages, my bad.Point is, throwing out his best does not change the story...Where are you getting that? You would/should throw out the last 2 years (04 and 03). Leaving you with 666/23 for a TD every 28.95 carries.Throwing out the worst and the best, the number becomes TD every 26 carries.
2. Him being a top 10 RB.
13th, 14th, 7th, 15th, 2nd. 2 top 10 finishes in 5 years. 5 top 15 finishes in 5 years. How is a top 10 finish an anomoly?
Double digits may not be likely this year, but they certainly wouldn't be considered an anomoly.
wilked
Footballguy
Feel free to draft off of numbers from the 90s, more power to youHint, Tiki has been in the NFL for 8 years, not 5.You are using the word anomoly much too loosely.TD Totals last 5 years: 9, 4, 11, 3, 15I don't see double digit TDs as the norm for Tiki. Notice that both years he finished in the top 10 he had double digit TDs. Maybe I should reword the 2nd point to double digit TD output.I agree on 1, but as for point #2:In 2000 he finished 13th among fantasy backs, in 2001 when he finished 14th, in 2002 when he finished 7th, in 2003 when he finished 15th and last year when he was the 2nd best fantasy back in football.I think it does, but that really does not matter. I see 2 anomolies with Barber.1. His low TD per touch output in 2003.I was averaging the averages, my bad.Point is, throwing out his best does not change the story...Where are you getting that? You would/should throw out the last 2 years (04 and 03). Leaving you with 666/23 for a TD every 28.95 carries.Throwing out the worst and the best, the number becomes TD every 26 carries.
2. Him being a top 10 RB.
13th, 14th, 7th, 15th, 2nd. 2 top 10 finishes in 5 years. 5 top 15 finishes in 5 years. How is a top 10 finish an anomoly?
Double digits may not be likely this year, but they certainly wouldn't be considered an anomoly.
bagger.
The One Play Quiz
I personally have him ranked 4th (I am typically higher on Tiki than most) but I would not draft him until the 2nd round based on his ADP.I don't expect most to agree with the #4 RB ranking, but to have him any lower than 11th or 12th and understanding that the difference between the #8 RB and the #15 RB is typically small, I think most here are arguing over nuances.
jurb26
Footballguy
I have him at 18, which is as low as anyone around I would guess. I just don't see enough TDs for him to place him much higher. On top of that, there seems to be a lot of good RBs out there ready to make a move or reclaim a high spot IMO. There is nothing wrong with you ranking Tiki that high and I respect your edgy thinking. You and I are just clearly on opposite ends of the spectrum on this one.
jafo
Out of Mind
I've read through all the crap in this thread and have come to this conclusion:11 total TDs for Tiki is possible, but not likely. Bad projection.3 total TDs for Tiki is totally possible, and he'll likely exceed that number by halfway through the season. Bad projection.Bottom line: Tiki will end up with a TD total closer to 11 than 3.
Last edited by a moderator:
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
With these stats: 278-1216-2; 69-461-1 he ranked #15. You don't think he can put that up this year?
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
jurb said he ranked Tiki #18 because of TDs not receptions. Even if you cut his receptions in half, you'd have to add that total to his rushing attempts, because the example year he only carried the ball 278 times.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Not to mention it's not fair to say "look how Tiki did with Manning at QB."Look at the schedule he faced.With Warner: PHI, WAS, CLE, GNB, DAL, DET, MIN, CHI, ARIWith Manning: ATL, PHI, WAS, BAL, PIT, CIN, DAL.Alot tougher.
H.K.
Footballguy
Not necessarily. Tiki accounted for something like 42% of the offense last season, and the Giants definitely want to have a more diversified workload this year. One major goal is to get the WR's more involved, so they'll spread the ball around a bit more in the passing game, which will equate to fewer catches. They also want to keep Tiki fresher by using other backs, too. It is very possible he will lose both carries and receptions in 2005 when compared to 2004. Hypothetically, let's say Tiki gets 280 rushes and forty catches, that's still 20 touches per week, which is plenty of involvement on a per game basis but a considerable dip from 2004.
what if there is an FBG Mag "cover jinx"? has anyone considered that possibility?
KnowledgeReignsSupreme
Footballguy
Looks like something Curtis Martin has done recently. Can't wait to see where this one is going.
KnowledgeReignsSupreme
Footballguy
Sounds like every offseason the last several years.
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
That would also make him more effective.
Insert year here ______. Every year they say the same thing. Every year Tiki gets undervalued.
Hypothetically using your stats Tiki would still be good enough for top 15. Michael Pittman was the #16 back with these stats 219-926-7, 41-391-9.5-3
H.K.
Footballguy
Correct! CuMar 2003The similarities between Martin that season and Barber this year are similar. Same coach from the previous year decides to sit a proven commodity for a youger back at the GL. (IIRC from previous post Martin and Barber have roughly the same TD/carry ratio, too). Both squads feature a young QB in his second year as starter, too. People poo-poo'ed the idea of Martin taking a major hit in TD's as a result of Jordan in the pre-season of 2003, too....deja vu....
Snotbubbles
Footballguy
Pittman also had 60 less carries. And I'm only using YOUR hypothetical doom and gloom numbers. Barring injury there's no reason to think Barber won't see 300 carries again even if his reception dip to 40.
Similar threads
