Kevin Smith (1 Viewer)

[aburt19]

Last year everyone was saying that Larry Johnson was a prime injury candidate because of the number of carries that he had in 2006. That predicition came

true and Johnson was injured for much of the season (and ineffective for much of the rest of the time).

My question is why isn't there concern over the workload that Kevin Smith logged in college in 2007 (450 carries)? It would seem that he would also be at

increased risk of injury this season due to the heavy workload in 2007.

Assuming that there is an increased risk of injury, it would seem to me that Tatum Bell could be a sleeper this season.

 

[Colin Dowling]

Last year everyone was saying that Larry Johnson was a prime injury candidate because of the number of carries that he had in 2006. That predicition cametrue and Johnson was injured for much of the season (and ineffective for much of the rest of the time).My question is why isn't there concern over the workload that Kevin Smith logged in college in 2007 (450 carries)? It would seem that he would also be atincreased risk of injury this season due to the heavy workload in 2007.Assuming that there is an increased risk of injury, it would seem to me that Tatum Bell could be a sleeper this season.

Perhaps a valid point, but 450 carries against college competition is a bit different then multiple seasons in a row of running in to 8-in-the-box NFL players.Also, your premise is based on the notion that Smith will be given a lot of carries this season. The risk of wearing down is negated quite a bit if, for example, he is being used to spell Bell 2 series a game for the first 8 weeks (which is as likely as happening as him being the bellcow).

 

[JamesTheScot]

Last year everyone was saying that Larry Johnson was a prime injury candidate because of the number of carries that he had in 2006. That predicition cametrue and Johnson was injured for much of the season (and ineffective for much of the rest of the time).My question is why isn't there concern over the workload that Kevin Smith logged in college in 2007 (450 carries)? It would seem that he would also be atincreased risk of injury this season due to the heavy workload in 2007.Assuming that there is an increased risk of injury, it would seem to me that Tatum Bell could be a sleeper this season.

Perhaps a valid point, but 450 carries against college competition is a bit different then multiple seasons in a row of running in to 8-in-the-box NFL players.Also, your premise is based on the notion that Smith will be given a lot of carries this season. The risk of wearing down is negated quite a bit if, for example, he is being used to spell Bell 2 series a game for the first 8 weeks (which is as likely as happening as him being the bellcow).

I think the 16 game schedule over 17 weeks will have more of an impact than will his heavy workload last year. I'm not a big believer in the workload=injury theory other than that more carries simply means more opportunities to end up twisted in the pile. If a severed ACL can be repaired and healed enough to play on in one offseason, the offseason is enough time for the bruises and mild sprains from last season to heal.That said, I held on to T.Bell this offseason just because there's no guarantee K.Smith will win the job. I'm not counting on T.Bell by any means, just have him in my pocket just in case...

 

[Ron_Mexico]

Is this some sort of ploy ?

 

[gheemony]

There is an article about this in Pro Football Prospectus 2008.

 

[aburt19]

Also, your premise is based on the notion that Smith will be given a lot of carries this season. The risk of wearing down is negated quite a bit if, for example, he is being used to spell Bell 2 series a game for the first 8 weeks (which is as likely as happening as him being the bellcow).

The Lions rushed 324 times last year with Mike Martz as their offensive coordinator. They have stated that they intend to run the ball more. I don't think thatmeans that they are going to go to 500 attempts, but would be surprised if they don't hit 360-400.The current FB Guys expert rankings have Smith ahead of Selvin Young and Julius Jones in the rankings and WAY ahead of Tatum Bell. That would seem toindicate that they think the Smith will exceed Bell by a large amount. I would estimate that in order for the rankings to be the way they are, Smith would haveto get 65-70 of the work during the season. That would translate to as many as 280 carries, not including receptions.I'm not a big Tatum Bell fan, but I think that the draft position as show for him is low given the fact that Smith had a heavy workload in college (I know it's notthe NFL, but 450 carries even in Pee Wee football is a lot of carries). Again, it's all about opportunity. Tatum Bell as a very late round draft pick could paydividends.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

I think the chances of Kevin Smith starting and carrying the load are about 90%. How well he does depends on the line.

 

[puckalicious]

"Wanting" to run more and actually running more are pretty different. I don't expect RB carries for the Lions will increase all that much from last year, as they will be mostly airing it out in the 4th quarter playing from behind. I think they'll have about 350 total carries. I would love to be proved wrong though! Especially during any home games I might be at.

 

[UnknownCoach]

I'm seeing a growing number of people claiming that a high number of carries from previous year = increased injury risk. I dont buy that at all. Its really about the RBs current health, his age, and the workload he will receive this comeing year. A current heavy workload = current high fantasy points = current increased injury risk. But past heavy workload doesnt increase this year's fantasy points or injury risk. The reality is that RBs at the top of fantasy one year (who are the ones who got a heavy workload) are more likely to go downhill than uphill as a natural result of balance. The reality is that a heavy workload back has an increased injury risk because he's carrying the ball more. The reality is that a back who has sustained minor injuries in the past has an increased chance of reagravateing those injuries or makeing them worse. The reality is that the older a player gets, the increased risk of injury he has because age makes you both more fragile and makes it harder to recover from injuries. Those are realities. Trying to point to the statistics though and saying its because of the "number" of carries he had the year or two or three before is not reality. The statistic is the result of reality, not the other way around.

Kevin Smith is still young. That makes him a lower risk than an older back. Kevin Smith's injuries (every football player gets injuries, they doesnt mean they cant play with them) in college do not look very meaningful (as opposed to Stewart and others). His college carry tally actually shows good durability and current healthy status and he's unlikely to begin his NFL career getting a heavy workload. That makes him a low injury risk this year but also not a high fantasy pick because you want heavy workload RBs on your fantasy team.

 

[aburt19]

I'm seeing a growing number of people claiming that a high number of carries from previous year = increased injury risk. I dont buy that at all. Its really about the RBs current health, his age, and the workload he will receive this comeing year. A current heavy workload = current high fantasy points = current increased injury risk. But past heavy workload doesnt increase this year's fantasy points or injury risk. The reality is that RBs at the top of fantasy one year (who are the ones who got a heavy workload) are more likely to go downhill than uphill as a natural result of balance. The reality is that a heavy workload back has an increased injury risk because he's carrying the ball more. The reality is that a back who has sustained minor injuries in the past has an increased chance of reagravateing those injuries or makeing them worse. The reality is that the older a player gets, the increased risk of injury he has because age makes you both more fragile and makes it harder to recover from injuries. Those are realities. Trying to point to the statistics though and saying its because of the "number" of carries he had the year or two or three before is not reality. The statistic is the result of reality, not the other way around.Kevin Smith is still young. That makes him a lower risk than an older back. Kevin Smith's injuries (every football player gets injuries, they doesnt mean they cant play with them) in college do not look very meaningful (as opposed to Stewart and others). His college carry tally actually shows good durability and current healthy status and he's unlikely to begin his NFL career getting a heavy workload. That makes him a low injury risk this year but also not a high fantasy pick because you want heavy workload RBs on your fantasy team.

Based on the record, there IS an increase injury risk if the carries in the previous season are very high. Looking at the 2007 archives, there is an articleentitled Larry Johnson's 417 carries. That article lists 25 running backs that had exceeded 370 carries in a season. Of those 25 running backs, nine (36%)of those players did not play a full season the next year (I didn't include those that played 15 games based on the fact that they might have sat out thefinal game of the season due to having a playoff spot clinched). Those players missed an average of 6.9 games the season following the one in which theycarried the ball at least 370 times. The low on games played the following season was Jamal Anderson in 1999 with two games played. The high on gamesplayed the following season was C. Okoye with 14 games.Whether the reason is reaggravating an injury from the season before or whatever the reason, it looks to me like a player with number of carries is atincreased risk of injury. One additional year older doesn't account for that high an injury rate the following year. Many of those players went on to havegood seasons after the injury year (J. Lewis, J. Bettis, M. Allen, etc).

 

[Addai's Adidas]

Just to reiterate, if the Lions are running more in the third and forth quarters the fans will be screaming to pass because they are down by 17. THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO RUN DOWN THE CLOCK!

 

[aburt19]

Just to reiterate, if the Lions are running more in the third and forth quarters the fans will be screaming to pass because they are down by 17. THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO RUN DOWN THE CLOCK!

I have no doubt that late in the game the Lions will be passing. But I think that their idea is to keep the defense off the field by running the ball early in thegame. I don't say that they will be successful with that strategy, but they will certainly run more that a Mike Martz offense would early in the game. Martz onlyran the ball because he was afraid the quarterback's arm would fall of if he threw 60 times a game.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Just to reiterate, if the Lions are running more in the third and forth quarters the fans will be screaming to pass because they are down by 17. THIS IS NOT THE TIME TO RUN DOWN THE CLOCK!

Last year, the Lion's were getting away from the run WAY too early in quite a few games and that certainly didn't help the defense. They quit running in the FIRST quarter last year.

 

[shader]

As a Titans fan who watched Jeff Fisher run Eddie George into the ground one year a few years back, only to see George NEVER fully recover, I can tell you that punishing your starting RB is about the dumbest thing you can do.

Fisher learned his lesson, which is why the Titans have 3 rb's on the roster now, all drafted in the 2nd round or higher.

I think the days of bellcow running backs are coming to an end, provided that enough good young running backs keep coming through the ranks.

 

[Banger]

As a Titans fan who watched Jeff Fisher run Eddie George into the ground one year a few years back, only to see George NEVER fully recover, I can tell you that punishing your starting RB is about the dumbest thing you can do.Fisher learned his lesson, which is why the Titans have 3 rb's on the roster now, all drafted in the 2nd round or higher.I think the days of bellcow running backs are coming to an end, provided that enough good young running backs keep coming through the ranks.

I don't think it has anything to do with not wanting to wear down his backs, I think he's trying to find a good one.

 

[rolltideroll]

Last year everyone was saying that Larry Johnson was a prime injury candidate because of the number of carries that he had in 2006. That predicition cametrue and Johnson was injured for much of the season (and ineffective for much of the rest of the time).My question is why isn't there concern over the workload that Kevin Smith logged in college in 2007 (450 carries)? It would seem that he would also be atincreased risk of injury this season due to the heavy workload in 2007.Assuming that there is an increased risk of injury, it would seem to me that Tatum Bell could be a sleeper this season.

Perhaps a valid point, but 450 carries against college competition is a bit different then multiple seasons in a row of running in to 8-in-the-box NFL players.Also, your premise is based on the notion that Smith will be given a lot of carries this season. The risk of wearing down is negated quite a bit if, for example, he is being used to spell Bell 2 series a game for the first 8 weeks (which is as likely as happening as him being the bellcow).

I think the 16 game schedule over 17 weeks will have more of an impact than will his heavy workload last year. I'm not a big believer in the workload=injury theory other than that more carries simply means more opportunities to end up twisted in the pile. If a severed ACL can be repaired and healed enough to play on in one offseason, the offseason is enough time for the bruises and mild sprains from last season to heal.That said, I held on to T.Bell this offseason just because there's no guarantee K.Smith will win the job. I'm not counting on T.Bell by any means, just have him in my pocket just in case...

Great thought and excellent insight.Let me ask you as a fellow Bell owner - are you gonna go after Kevin Smith in your draft?I'm in a 12 man auction league in it's 2nd season. I have bell for $4..I thought I might go up to $12 on Smith ($200 cap..flex...team defenses).

 

[Routilla]

How well he does depends on the line.

Anyone have a good analysis on the DET OL?

 

[gman74]

Detroit lost there best OL in Woody and there 1st rnd pick is fighting with George foster for a starting spot who was there worst OL last season.

 

[simmonjm]

Has anyone taken into consideration the tough schedule the Lions have. 6 games against the Vikings, Packers, and Bears all stout against the run then they face the Titans, Colts, and Jaguars. Not exactly good matchups.

 

[Routilla]

Has anyone taken into consideration the tough schedule the Lions have. 6 games against the Vikings, Packers, and Bears all stout against the run then they face the Titans, Colts, and Jaguars. Not exactly good matchups.

I don't see the Bears as the DEF that they were a few short years ago vs the run. But it may be a lot to ask of a rookie RB in a more run oriented offense, especially if the DET defense gives up points early and often. I guess it really depends on where you can draft KS. I'm in a 10 team league and I'd draft him in the 10th round but not in the 8th which is where he is going in mocks.

 

[simmonjm]

Has anyone taken into consideration the tough schedule the Lions have. 6 games against the Vikings, Packers, and Bears all stout against the run then they face the Titans, Colts, and Jaguars. Not exactly good matchups.

I don't see the Bears as the DEF that they were a few short years ago vs the run. But it may be a lot to ask of a rookie RB in a more run oriented offense, especially if the DET defense gives up points early and often. I guess it really depends on where you can draft KS. I'm in a 10 team league and I'd draft him in the 10th round but not in the 8th which is where he is going in mocks.

Many of the same players the Bears had on defense during thier superbowl run are still with the team. Injuries hit the Bears defense hard last year. The Bears defense could surprise and I think they are underrated.

 

[UnknownCoach]

I'm seeing a growing number of people claiming that a high number of carries from previous year = increased injury risk. I dont buy that at all. Its really about the RBs current health, his age, and the workload he will receive this comeing year. A current heavy workload = current high fantasy points = current increased injury risk. But past heavy workload doesnt increase this year's fantasy points or injury risk. The reality is that RBs at the top of fantasy one year (who are the ones who got a heavy workload) are more likely to go downhill than uphill as a natural result of balance. The reality is that a heavy workload back has an increased injury risk because he's carrying the ball more. The reality is that a back who has sustained minor injuries in the past has an increased chance of reagravateing those injuries or makeing them worse. The reality is that the older a player gets, the increased risk of injury he has because age makes you both more fragile and makes it harder to recover from injuries. Those are realities. Trying to point to the statistics though and saying its because of the "number" of carries he had the year or two or three before is not reality. The statistic is the result of reality, not the other way around.Kevin Smith is still young. That makes him a lower risk than an older back. Kevin Smith's injuries (every football player gets injuries, they doesnt mean they cant play with them) in college do not look very meaningful (as opposed to Stewart and others). His college carry tally actually shows good durability and current healthy status and he's unlikely to begin his NFL career getting a heavy workload. That makes him a low injury risk this year but also not a high fantasy pick because you want heavy workload RBs on your fantasy team.

Based on the record, there IS an increase injury risk if the carries in the previous season are very high. Looking at the 2007 archives, there is an articleentitled Larry Johnson's 417 carries. That article lists 25 running backs that had exceeded 370 carries in a season. Of those 25 running backs, nine (36%)of those players did not play a full season the next year (I didn't include those that played 15 games based on the fact that they might have sat out thefinal game of the season due to having a playoff spot clinched). Those players missed an average of 6.9 games the season following the one in which theycarried the ball at least 370 times. The low on games played the following season was Jamal Anderson in 1999 with two games played. The high on gamesplayed the following season was C. Okoye with 14 games.Whether the reason is reaggravating an injury from the season before or whatever the reason, it looks to me like a player with number of carries is atincreased risk of injury. One additional year older doesn't account for that high an injury rate the following year. Many of those players went on to havegood seasons after the injury year (J. Lewis, J. Bettis, M. Allen, etc).

The problem with your reasoning is like I said, the stat is a result of the realities and not the other way around. If you base your reasoning on the stat of how many carries a player got the previous year, your reasoning is faulted. The number doesnt increase the player's risk at all. Its the realities that cause the numbers to fall on averages when looking at what happened in the past with a large number of samples. Saying a player is a bigger risk because he received x number of carries last year is wrong. Saying he's a bigger risk because he's likely to get a big workload again despite being older would be right if that back has aged above the average. Kevin Smith, as a rookie, is one of the league's youngest backs and he's not likely to get a heavy workload. So he's a low injury risk.

 

[AnonymousBob]

I'm seeing a growing number of people claiming that a high number of carries from previous year = increased injury risk. I dont buy that at all. Its really about the RBs current health, his age, and the workload he will receive this comeing year. A current heavy workload = current high fantasy points = current increased injury risk. But past heavy workload doesnt increase this year's fantasy points or injury risk. The reality is that RBs at the top of fantasy one year (who are the ones who got a heavy workload) are more likely to go downhill than uphill as a natural result of balance. The reality is that a heavy workload back has an increased injury risk because he's carrying the ball more. The reality is that a back who has sustained minor injuries in the past has an increased chance of reagravateing those injuries or makeing them worse. The reality is that the older a player gets, the increased risk of injury he has because age makes you both more fragile and makes it harder to recover from injuries. Those are realities. Trying to point to the statistics though and saying its because of the "number" of carries he had the year or two or three before is not reality. The statistic is the result of reality, not the other way around.Kevin Smith is still young. That makes him a lower risk than an older back. Kevin Smith's injuries (every football player gets injuries, they doesnt mean they cant play with them) in college do not look very meaningful (as opposed to Stewart and others). His college carry tally actually shows good durability and current healthy status and he's unlikely to begin his NFL career getting a heavy workload. That makes him a low injury risk this year but also not a high fantasy pick because you want heavy workload RBs on your fantasy team.

Based on the record, there IS an increase injury risk if the carries in the previous season are very high. Looking at the 2007 archives, there is an articleentitled Larry Johnson's 417 carries. That article lists 25 running backs that had exceeded 370 carries in a season. Of those 25 running backs, nine (36%)of those players did not play a full season the next year (I didn't include those that played 15 games based on the fact that they might have sat out thefinal game of the season due to having a playoff spot clinched). Those players missed an average of 6.9 games the season following the one in which theycarried the ball at least 370 times. The low on games played the following season was Jamal Anderson in 1999 with two games played. The high on gamesplayed the following season was C. Okoye with 14 games.Whether the reason is reaggravating an injury from the season before or whatever the reason, it looks to me like a player with number of carries is atincreased risk of injury. One additional year older doesn't account for that high an injury rate the following year. Many of those players went on to havegood seasons after the injury year (J. Lewis, J. Bettis, M. Allen, etc).

This theory is bogus. Do a search - it's been widely discussed. With each touch a player receives, they're likely to get some some %. So the more touches they receive the more likely they are to get hurt. But players that get 100 carries and players that get 400 carries are likely to get hurt.

 

[Banger]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

 

[Bri]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

waiting for him to beat out Tatum still. It's been "a matter of time" for a while and well frankly I'm getting antsy about it.

 

[zamboni]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

waiting for him to beat out Tatum still. It's been "a matter of time" for a while and well frankly I'm getting antsy about it.

I don't have it in front of me, but there was a quick blurb on KFFL about Bell's lack of effectiveness. Nothing I see about Smith though, which may mean either nothing or the fact that the rookie hasn't impressed enough yet either.

 

[imagroid]

Last year everyone was saying that Larry Johnson was a prime injury candidate because of the number of carries that he had in 2006. That predicition came

true and Johnson was injured for much of the season (and ineffective for much of the rest of the time).

Sure about that? I have him at just under 13ppg before he was injured. Oh and the Rule of 370 is really really dumb if you ask me.

I just drafted smith 91st overall in a 12 team PPR. I was neither hot nor cold about it, he was just the BPA at the time. LOL...worried about Tatum Bell, c'mon!

 

[Bri]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

waiting for him to beat out Tatum still. It's been "a matter of time" for a while and well frankly I'm getting antsy about it.

I don't have it in front of me, but there was a quick blurb on KFFL about Bell's lack of effectiveness. Nothing I see about Smith though, which may mean either nothing or the fact that the rookie hasn't impressed enough yet either.

I read something yesterday (Smith owner) I got annoyed and don't have the link."Winging it" Bell does well in this system like he did most preseasons in Denver. Smith has had rookie learning mistakes and yet also looked like the better back. They think Smith can win the job and want him to win it convincingly. One blogger thought it might take Bell struggling in reg season and Smith doing well to seal the deal here. I don't agree but just that, that would even be thought of as a possibility bugged me.WIN IT ROOK! get this over with already!

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

Kevin Smith will start for the Lions. From what I've seen, it's hard to get excited about the Lions running game because their offensive line isn't that good.Kevin Smith looked good on one run last night, a 16 yarder on 2nd down and 17 where the defense was looking for pass.I see him as a borderline RB 2/flex option when the matchups are good, when they're poor like against Minny, unless I had to play him, I'd bench him.

 

[Banger]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

Kevin Smith will start for the Lions. From what I've seen, it's hard to get excited about the Lions running game because their offensive line isn't that good.Kevin Smith looked good on one run last night, a 16 yarder on 2nd down and 17 where the defense was looking for pass.I see him as a borderline RB 2/flex option when the matchups are good, when they're poor like against Minny, unless I had to play him, I'd bench him.

I'm looking more from a dynasty/keeper league perspective but I just haven't heard much at all. I didn't think I'd have a chance to snag him early in the offseason as he seemed to be a consensus top 5 pick. I don't know if that's the case now with Rice, Johnson, Jones all getting a lot of hype.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

Kevin Smith will start for the Lions. From what I've seen, it's hard to get excited about the Lions running game because their offensive line isn't that good.Kevin Smith looked good on one run last night, a 16 yarder on 2nd down and 17 where the defense was looking for pass.I see him as a borderline RB 2/flex option when the matchups are good, when they're poor like against Minny, unless I had to play him, I'd bench him.

I'm looking more from a dynasty/keeper league perspective but I just haven't heard much at all. I didn't think I'd have a chance to snag him early in the offseason as he seemed to be a consensus top 5 pick. I don't know if that's the case now with Rice, Johnson, Jones all getting a lot of hype.

Well, currently there's nobody on the team that has any talent at RB besides Smith if indeed he does have talent. Bell, Calhoun, Pinner, Cason....are all backup backs, guys that are OK but will never be the featured back. So from that standpoint, Smith will have every chance to be a star in this league. On top of that, Marinelli is focused on running the ball this season, so if he's ever going to do it, these next couple years he should be able to bust out.

 

[baconisgood]

I'm seeing a growing number of people claiming that a high number of carries from previous year = increased injury risk. I dont buy that at all. Its really about the RBs current health, his age, and the workload he will receive this comeing year. A current heavy workload = current high fantasy points = current increased injury risk. But past heavy workload doesnt increase this year's fantasy points or injury risk. The reality is that RBs at the top of fantasy one year (who are the ones who got a heavy workload) are more likely to go downhill than uphill as a natural result of balance. The reality is that a heavy workload back has an increased injury risk because he's carrying the ball more. The reality is that a back who has sustained minor injuries in the past has an increased chance of reagravateing those injuries or makeing them worse. The reality is that the older a player gets, the increased risk of injury he has because age makes you both more fragile and makes it harder to recover from injuries. Those are realities. Trying to point to the statistics though and saying its because of the "number" of carries he had the year or two or three before is not reality. The statistic is the result of reality, not the other way around.Kevin Smith is still young. That makes him a lower risk than an older back. Kevin Smith's injuries (every football player gets injuries, they doesnt mean they cant play with them) in college do not look very meaningful (as opposed to Stewart and others). His college carry tally actually shows good durability and current healthy status and he's unlikely to begin his NFL career getting a heavy workload. That makes him a low injury risk this year but also not a high fantasy pick because you want heavy workload RBs on your fantasy team.

Based on the record, there IS an increase injury risk if the carries in the previous season are very high. Looking at the 2007 archives, there is an articleentitled Larry Johnson's 417 carries. That article lists 25 running backs that had exceeded 370 carries in a season. Of those 25 running backs, nine (36%)of those players did not play a full season the next year (I didn't include those that played 15 games based on the fact that they might have sat out thefinal game of the season due to having a playoff spot clinched). Those players missed an average of 6.9 games the season following the one in which theycarried the ball at least 370 times. The low on games played the following season was Jamal Anderson in 1999 with two games played. The high on gamesplayed the following season was C. Okoye with 14 games.Whether the reason is reaggravating an injury from the season before or whatever the reason, it looks to me like a player with number of carries is atincreased risk of injury. One additional year older doesn't account for that high an injury rate the following year. Many of those players went on to havegood seasons after the injury year (J. Lewis, J. Bettis, M. Allen, etc).

This theory is bogus. Do a search - it's been widely discussed. With each touch a player receives, they're likely to get some some %. So the more touches they receive the more likely they are to get hurt. But players that get 100 carries and players that get 400 carries are likely to get hurt.

This wouldn't explain the decrease in Y/C that occurs on average for players receiving >340 carries the year before.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

Kevin Smith will start for the Lions. From what I've seen, it's hard to get excited about the Lions running game because their offensive line isn't that good.Kevin Smith looked good on one run last night, a 16 yarder on 2nd down and 17 where the defense was looking for pass.I see him as a borderline RB 2/flex option when the matchups are good, when they're poor like against Minny, unless I had to play him, I'd bench him.

Most of the locals think Smith is a virtual lock to start. Bell not only is unlikely to start, his roster spot is not a certainty.

 

[Iwannabeacowboybaby!]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

Kevin Smith will start for the Lions. From what I've seen, it's hard to get excited about the Lions running game because their offensive line isn't that good.Kevin Smith looked good on one run last night, a 16 yarder on 2nd down and 17 where the defense was looking for pass.I see him as a borderline RB 2/flex option when the matchups are good, when they're poor like against Minny, unless I had to play him, I'd bench him.

Most of the locals think Smith is a virtual lock to start. Bell not only is unlikely to start, his roster spot is not a certainty.

I totally agree with you, although I don't think Bell will be cut. There's very little talent behind him and he at least has a little experience compared to guys like Calhoun or Pinner.How many RB's do you think they'll keep?I have them ranked:Smith, Bell, Calhoun, Cason and Pinner

 

[Anthony Borbely]

It's been very quiet about him this preseason, not good, not bad. He seems to be flying below the radar. Anyone have any info how he's doing in camp? How the coaching staff plans on using him? any info would be appreciated....

Kevin Smith will start for the Lions. From what I've seen, it's hard to get excited about the Lions running game because their offensive line isn't that good.Kevin Smith looked good on one run last night, a 16 yarder on 2nd down and 17 where the defense was looking for pass.I see him as a borderline RB 2/flex option when the matchups are good, when they're poor like against Minny, unless I had to play him, I'd bench him.

Most of the locals think Smith is a virtual lock to start. Bell not only is unlikely to start, his roster spot is not a certainty.

I totally agree with you, although I don't think Bell will be cut. There's very little talent behind him and he at least has a little experience compared to guys like Calhoun or Pinner.How many RB's do you think they'll keep?I have them ranked:Smith, Bell, Calhoun, Cason and Pinner

I think they will keep 3. I also think they will keep Bell, but it's no lock. I would not be surprised to see Bell cut and a RB not on the roster to be picked up.I think Cason is a lock for one of the spots and his return ability and overall special teams play is a big factor. My gut says Calhoun is gone along with Pinner.

 

[Bob Magaw]

I'm seeing a growing number of people claiming that a high number of carries from previous year = increased injury risk. I dont buy that at all. Its really about the RBs current health, his age, and the workload he will receive this comeing year. A current heavy workload = current high fantasy points = current increased injury risk. But past heavy workload doesnt increase this year's fantasy points or injury risk. The reality is that RBs at the top of fantasy one year (who are the ones who got a heavy workload) are more likely to go downhill than uphill as a natural result of balance. The reality is that a heavy workload back has an increased injury risk because he's carrying the ball more. The reality is that a back who has sustained minor injuries in the past has an increased chance of reagravateing those injuries or makeing them worse. The reality is that the older a player gets, the increased risk of injury he has because age makes you both more fragile and makes it harder to recover from injuries. Those are realities. Trying to point to the statistics though and saying its because of the "number" of carries he had the year or two or three before is not reality. The statistic is the result of reality, not the other way around.Kevin Smith is still young. That makes him a lower risk than an older back. Kevin Smith's injuries (every football player gets injuries, they doesnt mean they cant play with them) in college do not look very meaningful (as opposed to Stewart and others). His college carry tally actually shows good durability and current healthy status and he's unlikely to begin his NFL career getting a heavy workload. That makes him a low injury risk this year but also not a high fantasy pick because you want heavy workload RBs on your fantasy team.

Based on the record, there IS an increase injury risk if the carries in the previous season are very high. Looking at the 2007 archives, there is an articleentitled Larry Johnson's 417 carries. That article lists 25 running backs that had exceeded 370 carries in a season. Of those 25 running backs, nine (36%)of those players did not play a full season the next year (I didn't include those that played 15 games based on the fact that they might have sat out thefinal game of the season due to having a playoff spot clinched). Those players missed an average of 6.9 games the season following the one in which theycarried the ball at least 370 times. The low on games played the following season was Jamal Anderson in 1999 with two games played. The high on gamesplayed the following season was C. Okoye with 14 games.Whether the reason is reaggravating an injury from the season before or whatever the reason, it looks to me like a player with number of carries is atincreased risk of injury. One additional year older doesn't account for that high an injury rate the following year. Many of those players went on to havegood seasons after the injury year (J. Lewis, J. Bettis, M. Allen, etc).

This theory is bogus. Do a search - it's been widely discussed. With each touch a player receives, they're likely to get some some %. So the more touches they receive the more likely they are to get hurt. But players that get 100 carries and players that get 400 carries are likely to get hurt.

This wouldn't explain the decrease in Y/C that occurs on average for players receiving >340 carries the year before.

i think this point is telling and hard to refute...the liklihood (or not) of a RB getting injured after 340+ carries may well be (like a lot of things in football) a complicated stuation with multi-valent causes (think of trying to untangle a bowl of spaghetti)...while it may not be the sole explanation that heavily used RBs are more beat up next season, it could be just as simplistic to assume that these RBs are getting hurt just because they carry more in general & their risk is increased through that alone...this is of course true, at least partially, but it doesn't seem that controversial to suggest that a RB with 340+ carries may be more beat up the following season from the cumulative toll to the body, compared to a RB with 100, 150, 200 carries... not sure from the naysayers posts on this theory they are considering the possibility that the two explanations don't HAVE to be mutually exclusive... i don't get the resistance to this idea...i don't think we can know in a precise way that there is a linear correlation (exactly twice as many tackles = twice as much physical punishment & such a back would be EXACTLY twice as hurt), but it seems common sense that if you were smashed in the knee 10 X in a season you might be less likely to suffer aggravated injuries & make a more complete & quicker recovery than if you are smashed in the knee 20/30/40 X? injuries can linger into the next season...