pghrob
Footballguy
I am not sold on Bowe. So I shipped him in our 12 team dynasty for a 2011 1st rounder and Colt McCoy, who I then traded for another 2011 1st rounder.So: Bowe traded for 2 2011 1st round picks.
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!
Lets play Buy Low, Sell High and Hold game (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Matt's Eagles
- Start date
You can't just look at PPG, especially when you're talking about a guy like Gore who has missed time in 4 out of 5 seasons. One of the reasons why MJD>>>>Gore is because Gore has a long history of missing games, which isn't likely to change as he gets older. Yes, you got essentially the same PPG in the games they played, but zero in the two other games out of Gore, which you have to account for. So, if you said Gore + another RB that you had to plug in for the games Gore missed essentially scored the same as MJD, that maybe I could agree with, but Gore himself did not.
Max Power
Footballguy
I agree.for as much as people want to downplay his year, he didn't do that bad. He was dinged up in one game and not featured in another (Charles ran for 259 yards). You take out those two fluke games and he was ranked the 18th WR on a .5 PPG basis. Right there between Calvin and Boldin. I know its bending the stats, but its something to think about
Donnybrook
Footballguy
I see several Buy Lows on Matt Forte. I see two problems with that statement: Martz and Chester Taylor. Hold and hope that Martz tenure in Chicago is not long.
Sell - Caddy. He finally risen to a point where he has value. I would trade him now before age and injuries get the better of him.
Sell - 2nd round rookie draft picks. Too many reaches in that round IMO. Better off trading back or out.
Buy low - Trent Edwards, Chansi Stuckey, Louis Murphy.
Sell - Caddy. He finally risen to a point where he has value. I would trade him now before age and injuries get the better of him.
Sell - 2nd round rookie draft picks. Too many reaches in that round IMO. Better off trading back or out.
Buy low - Trent Edwards, Chansi Stuckey, Louis Murphy.
Gore's missed 5 games in 4 years. I'd hardly call that "a long history of missing games". You should check out the really old Drinen article, "everyone's an injury risk", for more details.
identikit
Footballguy
I know the Browns wr situation is wide open, but curious to know what you see in Stuckey.
His price is nearly zero in my leagues, but a roster spot has value.
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say the exact same thing about Trent Edwards. The guy averaged 150 yards per game last year despite having Terrell Owens, Lee Evans, and Fred Jackson. Now he's embroiled in a positional battle with a guy so bad that the Packers (a team starved for QB depth) let him go after a year and a half... despite having invested a 2nd round draft pick in him. I have no faith in Edward's ability to win a starting job in the first place, and even if he did manage to somehow pull off that feat, I have no faith in his ability to ever be a top-20 fantasy QB. The only time I'd burn a roster spot on him is if I was in a 2QB or Superflex league.
Dinsy Ejotuz
Footballguy
Not that it changes your point, but the Packers didn't let Brohm go. They had him on the practice squad, and the Bills claimed him. At which point the Packers tried to match the Bills offer. Brohm, not being an idiot, sized up his odds of starting on a team with Aaron Rogers or a team with Trent Edwards and decided to shuffle off to Buffalo.
Last edited by a moderator:
Buy
Choice - Eventually he'll get a chance
Pierre Thomas - In for a monster season
Brady - Younger than Manning. Do you really think they can't reload?
Jimmy Graham - Get on board sooner than later.
Garcon - The new Wayne to Wayne's Harrison.
Maroney - They did not bring in competition.
Sell
MSW - Value won't be any higher and has the chance to go down.
Mike Wallace - Value won't be any higher and has the chance to go down.
Hold/Buy
Gore - Could push for the #1RB this season and has a few years left.
Barber - Don't write him off
Austin - Will be the easy #1 this year and part of a Bruce/Holt pair for years to come.
Grant - Undervalued for win now teams.
Schaub - Should have consistant value for years.
Hold/Sell
Aromashodu - If you can get enough otherwise enjoy the ride
Wayne/Moss - Ride the ship down if you have a good team because you won't get enough value in trade.
Choice - Eventually he'll get a chance
Pierre Thomas - In for a monster season
Brady - Younger than Manning. Do you really think they can't reload?
Jimmy Graham - Get on board sooner than later.
Garcon - The new Wayne to Wayne's Harrison.
Maroney - They did not bring in competition.
Sell
MSW - Value won't be any higher and has the chance to go down.
Mike Wallace - Value won't be any higher and has the chance to go down.
Hold/Buy
Gore - Could push for the #1RB this season and has a few years left.
Barber - Don't write him off
Austin - Will be the easy #1 this year and part of a Bruce/Holt pair for years to come.
Grant - Undervalued for win now teams.
Schaub - Should have consistant value for years.
Hold/Sell
Aromashodu - If you can get enough otherwise enjoy the ride
Wayne/Moss - Ride the ship down if you have a good team because you won't get enough value in trade.
Carter_Can_Fly
Footballguy
SSOG,
My point is you can get Massaquoi for a bag of peanuts, and he is a guy who is in line to get 100 plus targets. He will be starting the year as a sophmore 23 year old who should be much improved from a rookie year where he got starter reps in games and practices. He has talentbeing a 2nd round pick one year ago. I think he is exactly the definition of by low in a dynasty format.
My point is you can get Massaquoi for a bag of peanuts, and he is a guy who is in line to get 100 plus targets. He will be starting the year as a sophmore 23 year old who should be much improved from a rookie year where he got starter reps in games and practices. He has talentbeing a 2nd round pick one year ago. I think he is exactly the definition of by low in a dynasty format.
JohnnyU
Footballguy
Look at the number of players you have in Fantasy Legends I. You must really like your team
Last edited by a moderator:
Still not sure why you're dismissing his rookie season, and it's not just about the number of games missed, it's the number of times he's been injured. He's been hurt in 4 out of his 5 NFL seasons, which is a long enough history for me. You can't call that a fluke. Yes, everyone is an injury risk. Some people are just more of a risk than others. Missing games due to injury in only 1 of 3 regular seasons (and none in 2 post seasons) isn't nearly as troubling as missing games in 4 of 5 seasons, including 3 straight. Call it what you want, but there's no comparison IMO.
WTF? Orton? RBrown? TJ Alphabet? What are you getting in return? C'mon...you are better than that.
Then SJax must be a huge red flag for you.
Donnybrook
Footballguy
His offensive coordinator was fired just before the season began. He only started a half a dozen games last season and played against their toughest opponents. Brohm lost out to a seventh round draft pick in GB and I won't be surprised when he loses out to another seventh round pick in Buffalo. Where are your buy lows?
Those are all very good reasons why he's a buy low. His production last season (which is what you first brought up) is not a very good reason why he's a buy low. Like I said, though... personally, I'm not a MoMass fan. Never have been. He's Charmin soft.
I make a point of never trusting anyone who doesn't take his own advice.Look at the number of players you have in Fantasy Legends I. You must really like your team
You're missing the point. Everyone is an injury risk. Some people are more of a risk than others. Frank Gore is not one of those "some people". The data showed that guys who miss 1-2 games a season are not really any more likely to miss time in year N+1 than guys who continually play 16 games a season. You don't buy the data, that's fine. You want to call Gore a heightened injury risk, that's fine. Personally, I'm not buying it at all. We've seen too many instances of guys getting dinged up in multiple seasons and getting the "injury prone" label, only to never miss significant time again in their entire career. According to the "everyone is an injury risk" study, even the paragons of health, guys who have played 32 consecutive games or more, have a less than 50% chance of playing a full season in year N+1. If we accept that- accept that there exist RBs who are less injury prone than their peers, and that even those guys have a 50% chance of missing a full season- then there's a 12.5% chance that a super-healthy RB would still miss games in three consecutive seasons purely by happenstance and bad luck.As for why I keep discounting Gore's rookie season... team's have a different threshold for injuries depending on how important a player is. There are injuries that would shut LenDale down for the season but, if they happened to Chris Johnson, wouldn't cause him to miss a single game. If a guy's the 38th name on the active list, it doesn't take much to bump him down to 46th on the list (and therefore land him on the inactive list). If he's the 3rd name on the active list, it takes a lot more. Just look at Brandon Tate last year- he played a couple of games, then landed on Injured Reserve because he "tweaked the injury"... when in reality, he didn't. He was just fine, New England just felt like freeing up the spot on their active roster, so they put him on IR. 5 years from now, we'll look back and see "Brandon Tate missed X games to injury", but the reality is that his "injury" was nothing more than him getting caught in the roster crunch. Similarly, we know that Frank Gore missed San Fran's 10th and 11th games in 2005 with a groin injury. We also know that he was San Fran's backup RB behind Kevan Barlow, and that he was only averaging 7 carries per game to that point in the season. In other words, he was obviously one of the last names on the active roster and it didn't take much to bump him to the inactive list. Those two missed games might have been legitimate "injury games", or they might not have been. Instead of trying to guess which games bubble players missed due to injury and which they missed due to just not being a big part of the game plan, I generally just disregard "games played" numbers for guys on the roster bubble.
I'll post some of them after I've succeeded in buying them low. I don't want to give my leaguemates any ideas. In the meantime, every time someone's been called a "sell high" and I've disagreed, odds are I've got that guy as a buy low (i.e. buy him from the people who think they are selling high). Frank Gore, Ochocinco, Smiff South. I'd also be querying the Jamaal Charles, Miles Austin, and Sidney Rice owners to see if they were True Believers, or if they were still on "fluke alert", because I'm definitely a True Believer. In terms of uberstuds, this might be your last chance to get Fitzgerald or Jonathan Stewart, although wise owners aren't going to be selling right now.
Absolutely. Don't get me wrong, I like Gore and SJax a lot, I have them both as top 10 RBs, but I don't see how you can look at their histories and not think that they are at a greater risk to miss games than guys like AP or MJD. It's really the biggest thing that separates them, because talent wise, you could make a case for putting them in any order.
EBF
Footballguy
In general, I'm big on youth in dynasty leagues and a big proponent of building around a young nucleus.
On the other hand, looking purely at long term value can get you in trouble. I learned this lesson the hard way after "building" dynasty teams around players like Kevan Barlow, Kevin Jones, William Green, and Julius Jones. I acquired these guys thinking that I had locked up a starting spot for 5-6 years only to discover that these players didn't actually have the talent to last. In the end, I would've been better off acquiring an aging star like Hines Ward, Derrick Mason, or Brett Favre instead.
That's the one reason why I might advocate a guy like Frank Gore or DeAngelo Williams over a Beanie Wells or CJ Spiller. Sure, Wells and Spiller are younger and offer more longevity potential IF they end up being elite talents, but that's a pretty big if. When you factor in the probability of a A-Train/Cadillac/Maroney/Reggie/Addai/Lynch/Forte/Slaton/KSmith/McFadden type of collapse, you might arrive at the conclusion that you should just place your bets with the boring old guy.
Youth is valuable, but only when coupled with elite talent. Today's trendy mediocre young players are tomorrow's Maroney/Lynch/Slaton.
On the other hand, looking purely at long term value can get you in trouble. I learned this lesson the hard way after "building" dynasty teams around players like Kevan Barlow, Kevin Jones, William Green, and Julius Jones. I acquired these guys thinking that I had locked up a starting spot for 5-6 years only to discover that these players didn't actually have the talent to last. In the end, I would've been better off acquiring an aging star like Hines Ward, Derrick Mason, or Brett Favre instead.
That's the one reason why I might advocate a guy like Frank Gore or DeAngelo Williams over a Beanie Wells or CJ Spiller. Sure, Wells and Spiller are younger and offer more longevity potential IF they end up being elite talents, but that's a pretty big if. When you factor in the probability of a A-Train/Cadillac/Maroney/Reggie/Addai/Lynch/Forte/Slaton/KSmith/McFadden type of collapse, you might arrive at the conclusion that you should just place your bets with the boring old guy.
Youth is valuable, but only when coupled with elite talent. Today's trendy mediocre young players are tomorrow's Maroney/Lynch/Slaton.
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG, I'm not missing the point at all. Frank Gore IS one of those people, unless most NFL RBs (and I'm comparing him to the elite RBs here) miss time due to injury in 80% of their NFL seasons.
You're wrong about the data- sure, the numbers aren't overwhelming, but they do show that a RB that played in all 16 games the previous season had a higher average number of games played the following season, and a higher percentage of them played all 16 games again, than those who missed time. That simply means that guys who played all 16 games last season, like AP and MJD, will have a higher average number of games played next season, and a slightly better chance at playing all 16 games, than a guy who did miss time, like Gore. My guess is that if we went back further, the odds would be even more against those who missed time in multiple seasons. It doesn't mean that Gore won't play in the same or more games than AP and MJD next year, but the odds don't favor it.
I went back and looked, and I'm pretty sure Gore had a legit injury his rookie year. In week 10 he had his highest number of carries of the season to date, and he outperformed Barlow in that game. Rookie Maurice Hicks didn't see the field until week 11 when Gore was out, and Barlow left week 11 early with a concussion, so I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have picked those two games to sit Gore if he wasn't injured. Those count in my book.
You're wrong about the data- sure, the numbers aren't overwhelming, but they do show that a RB that played in all 16 games the previous season had a higher average number of games played the following season, and a higher percentage of them played all 16 games again, than those who missed time. That simply means that guys who played all 16 games last season, like AP and MJD, will have a higher average number of games played next season, and a slightly better chance at playing all 16 games, than a guy who did miss time, like Gore. My guess is that if we went back further, the odds would be even more against those who missed time in multiple seasons. It doesn't mean that Gore won't play in the same or more games than AP and MJD next year, but the odds don't favor it.
I went back and looked, and I'm pretty sure Gore had a legit injury his rookie year. In week 10 he had his highest number of carries of the season to date, and he outperformed Barlow in that game. Rookie Maurice Hicks didn't see the field until week 11 when Gore was out, and Barlow left week 11 early with a concussion, so I'm pretty sure they wouldn't have picked those two games to sit Gore if he wasn't injured. Those count in my book.
Obviously the key is not striking out on the young player you're trading for. Will you ever be 100% right? No, but in order to build a great dynasty team, you obviously gotta hit more than you miss, and it comes down to how much you believe in someone's talent. Sure, one can play it safe and keep the Gores/DeAngelo/Ward/Mason and use em up until they hang it up and there's certainly nothing wrong with that approach. I prefer to go the riskier route and trust what I see on these young players that i believe in.
madd futher
Footballguy
In dynasty, I consider the concept of "buy low/sell high" pretty much a total waste, because A) most owners have their own defined concept of player values, and B ) the "buy low/sell high players" are generally players who's values are in flux - the concept is mainly situational for a very short term. For instance, guys that I might consider to be "buy lows" right now would include T.O. and Matt Jones - both can be had for next to nothing right now and might pay off big later on.
Therefore, I'll lay out what I consider some more important concepts. To me, it is much more meaningful to learn your trading partners and how they value players: who is willing to over-pay for a particular talent on your roster and which players an owner might undervalue on his own roster. The trick here is threefold:
1st - as Bloom always says, you have to have clarity in ranking of all the relevant players in your league to begin with, and then move players up or down based on events that unfold during the off-season. Unless you can learn how to make and maintain an updated personal player ranking, you will not be a good trader. Like they say in the NFL 'war rooms" you have to learn to trust your own board. Examples of some guys I moved up in my rankings based on off-season events are Tony Romo (with the addition of Bryant), and Mike Wallace (who I DID buy low about a week BEFORE the Santonio Holmes suspension and trade went down - some things you just have to have a feel for.) Both these guys moved from second tier to 1st tier players on my board based on these happenings.
Secondly, you have to learn to think like each and every owner in your league - where are they weak, where are they strong, and what strategies will they use to try to build their roster? What is their philosophy about trading?
Thirdly, you need to learn what their individual trading styles are, and which players they really want. The trick is to find out how the other owner feels about a certain player. This often involves an artful "negotiating dance" which may include throwing out offers for "packages" of his players for "packages" of yours , and then asking if he has any interest in one of them.
I much prefer this approach to putting out some of my players on a 'trade board'. This makes no sense to me because ALL of my players are up for trade (for the right players in return). I try to collect as many top tier (green coded players) as I possibly can, and next I consider younger break-out potential "high upside players" (my yellow code players). Lastly I fill in my roster with a few "rentals" - generally older players who will give consistent performance and outproduce expectations just about every year.
So far this offseason, in one league with active trading, in one league I feel like I went from 5 "greenies "to 7 "greenies" and picked up three 1st round draft picks (two 2010s and one 2011) in the process.
Therefore, I'll lay out what I consider some more important concepts. To me, it is much more meaningful to learn your trading partners and how they value players: who is willing to over-pay for a particular talent on your roster and which players an owner might undervalue on his own roster. The trick here is threefold:
1st - as Bloom always says, you have to have clarity in ranking of all the relevant players in your league to begin with, and then move players up or down based on events that unfold during the off-season. Unless you can learn how to make and maintain an updated personal player ranking, you will not be a good trader. Like they say in the NFL 'war rooms" you have to learn to trust your own board. Examples of some guys I moved up in my rankings based on off-season events are Tony Romo (with the addition of Bryant), and Mike Wallace (who I DID buy low about a week BEFORE the Santonio Holmes suspension and trade went down - some things you just have to have a feel for.) Both these guys moved from second tier to 1st tier players on my board based on these happenings.
Secondly, you have to learn to think like each and every owner in your league - where are they weak, where are they strong, and what strategies will they use to try to build their roster? What is their philosophy about trading?
Thirdly, you need to learn what their individual trading styles are, and which players they really want. The trick is to find out how the other owner feels about a certain player. This often involves an artful "negotiating dance" which may include throwing out offers for "packages" of his players for "packages" of yours , and then asking if he has any interest in one of them.
I much prefer this approach to putting out some of my players on a 'trade board'. This makes no sense to me because ALL of my players are up for trade (for the right players in return). I try to collect as many top tier (green coded players) as I possibly can, and next I consider younger break-out potential "high upside players" (my yellow code players). Lastly I fill in my roster with a few "rentals" - generally older players who will give consistent performance and outproduce expectations just about every year.
So far this offseason, in one league with active trading, in one league I feel like I went from 5 "greenies "to 7 "greenies" and picked up three 1st round draft picks (two 2010s and one 2011) in the process.
Last edited by a moderator:
Frankly, I think it was a miracle that Addai held the job this past year. Part of it was that he rose to the occasion, but I also think Brown (who is much more talented) got off to a slow start. I know there are folks on the board who throw around the term "does not pass the eye ball test" when referring to players and Addai is mine. When I see him run and I see his stats, he reminds me of karim Abdul-Jabbar, a nose for the end zone and little else. Had he not been playing for a team that is so feared through the air, he would have been a blip on our radar screens of the likes of Anthony Thomas.I hate it when the OP doesn't list theirs.
Buy - Hakeem Nicks even though he isn't cheap, but don't over pay. Jared Cook because he is cheap. Matt Ryan because a lot of owners think he will always put up mediocre fantasy stats. I'm not one that believes that. Felix Jones because owners are skeptical about him staying healthy. Devin Thomas, I look for him to breakout this year with McNabb. Some still question his work ethic, but he made significant progress last year. Robert Meachem, he really started to show what he can do last year. I look for that to continue if he's healthy. Mike Thomas is a buy and sell. I really like him, and he could be the next Steve Smith (Car), but maybe not. San Fran Defense.
Sell - Steven Jackson, may have a good year this year, but it's almost time to unload him. Miles Austin, call me a non-believer, plus, this will be Dez Bryant's team before long. Joesph Addai if you CAN sell him. I give him one more year. Brandon Marshall, new team, and he's still a time bomb waiting to explode. Reggie Wayne may have two good years left, but I say he only has one. Percy Harvin, his migraines are a constant hassle, I believe the possibility of not having Favre will affect him more than Rice, and he will never be a #1 WR, even though he could be a productive one. Darren McFadden if you can sell him. May be too late. There's talk about making him a 3rd down back full time. Mike Thomas is a buy and sell. I really like him, and he could be the next Steve Smith (Car), but maybe not.
Hold - Kenny Britt, I'm not convinced he has the work ethic needed, and his friends are questionable, but all of that may or may not be an issue with Britt. Sydney Rice, some say he's a sell, I don't. His talent is real no matter who is at QB. Santonio Holmes because you can't get what he's worth. If you can sell him for a decent price do it, but most owners are in a holding pattern with this guy. Ben Roethlisberger, he's an obvious hold, but one more screw up and he's history for a year. I can't tell if Marion Barber is a hold or dump for Junior Mints
Dump for Junior Mints - Darrius Heyward-Bey, Jake Delhomme, Brady Quinn, Mercedes Lewis, Kyle Orton, Steve Slaton (jk....maybe), Roy Williams, Kevin Smith (he wasn't any good before the injury), Terrell Owens, Lee Evans (let's say I can't stand this guy on my teams). David Garrard (see Lee Evans).
EBF
Footballguy
Yea, and those guys were great gambles before their breakouts because they had reasonable price tags. Ray Rice and Chris Johnson went in the 6th-7th round of my two dynasty startups before their rookie seasons. Greg Jennings was probably a round 10+ pick before his rookie year. I'm all for gambling on young talent when the price is right.The price usually isn't right in the first 4-5 rounds unless you're looking at a can't-miss talent. Even then, you'd better be right because there's very little margin for error. I usually only make these kind of picks in the first few rounds when it's a player who obviously has an elite combination of football talent, pedigree, and demonstrated production (Crabtree, Calvin, Stewart, etc).
Basically, even "healthy" RBs only have a 50% chance of surviving the season. It's a coin flip. Frank Gore is a coin that has flipped "tails" in 4 of the last 5 flips. You see that data and are very quick to cry out that the coin is obviously weighted. I see that data and I say "splits happen".The problem with the whole concept of an "injury-resistant RB" is that it's something of a tautology. We say that any RB that doesn't miss time is injury resistant, and define injury resistant as meaning an RB that doesn't miss time. In reality, a player's susceptibility to injury is hardly as binary "did he or didn't he get injured?" situation. You could take the most injury prone Homo Sapien that this planet as ever produced, then tell Ted Washington to roll over his plant leg, and I'll tell you what- that guy's leg is going to break every time. Does that mean that the guy wasn't injury resistant? No, it just means that using binary "yes/no" flags to measure a player's resistance to injury does a woefully inadequate job. Do I believe that some players are more injury prone than others? Absolutely I believe that, without question. I just don't know how to look at a player's injury history and differentiate between "injury prone player who got injured" and "healthy player who got injured". Or, for that matter, between "injury prone player who stayed healthy" and "healthy player who stayed healthy". Case in point... you're holding up Adrian Peterson as exactly the kind of model of health that Gore should aspire to be... but the reality is that, coming into the league, perhaps the biggest knock on Peterson was that he was nearly universally hailed as injury prone.
That's the problem with using injuries as the only test for injury proneness- it's backward-looking and of little predictive value. The "healthy guys" remain "healthy guys" until they get injured, at which point they become "injury prone guys" and remain such until they go a specific time without getting injured, at which point they become "healthy guys" again. Making draft decisions based on last year's injury reports only ensures that you'll always be a year behind the curve, paying a "healthy premium" for players who already went through their healthy phase, and missing out on the "injury prone discount" on guys just about to enter it. You're right that Drinen's study does find a difference between backs who play 16 games and backs who just miss a game or two... but the difference is nearly insignificant, a mere sixth tenths of a game a season. If you expect Frank Gore and Maurice Jones-Drew to both score 15 ppg next season, then the difference between MJD's injury history and Gore's should amount to 9 fantasy points over a full year. NINE! That's how many points MJD's "iron man" reputation is worth compared to Gore's "injury prone" label. If you want to devalue Gore by 9 or 10 fantasy points because of his history, then that's perfectly rational and justifiable... but the way that you and others have spoken about his injuries in this and other threads, I can guarantee you that he's being discounted by more than 9 or 10 fantasy points.
Finally, we have your assertion that it's better to miss 4 games to one injury than it is to miss 1 game to injury 4 different times (in 4 different seasons). It's an interesting theory, but until I see some kind of support for it, I don't see any reason at all to think that Gore (1.25 missed games a year- or, if you're really hell bent on including his rookie season, then a whopping 1.40 missed games a year!) is more injury prone than Mendenhall (6 missed games a year).
Now, I just spent a lot of time criticizing the current system, so before anyone fires back and asks me if I have a better way to find out if a player is "injury prone"... I don't know. I do have a different way, though, and it's served me well so far. Instead of just calling anything that causes a player to miss time an "injury" and treating it exactly the same, I actually look at what the injuries were and see if the player has a propensity for a certain type of injury. I consider all injuries that are unique in his history to be non-predictive events and simply look for a propensity towards certain types of injuries, or any other trends or patterns to his injuries. The only injury Gore has shown any propensity towards is an ACL injury... and that's hardly relevant anymore, since both of his apparently faulty ACLs have already been replaced (and the new ligaments have been battle-tested for 5 years with no issues). The other injuries have been garden variety dings that every RB suffers- a broken bone in his hand, tweaked ankles, strained groin. Nothing serious, nothing chronic, and nothing degenerative. Moreover, Gore's also shown a repeated ability to return from injuries ahead of the original timeline, which suggests he's a quick healer and offers some security that, even if he IS a heightened injury risk, he's probably a lower risk to miss long stretches of time.
tl;dr- Frank Gore's "injury history" essentially amounts to an expected difference of maybe 10 points a year between Gore and MJD.
Lott's Fingertip
Footballguy
The actual sample sizes we are dealing with when we are talking about one season to the next are too small to be used in a predictive way.
A high ankle sprain can happen to anybody. It heals and is no longer a problem. Ditto for any number of minor injuries.
Major injuries require a wait and see approach... you have to see the player play again before evaluating how much the injury has affected him. Edge blew out his ACL and never regained his burst. Gore has blown both out and is still elite.
Chronic injuries or degenerative injuries are the only ones that can be predictive, imo.
It's only a coin flip for "healthy" RBs that have played in all 16 games- it's less than a coin flip for those who have missed games, like Gore, so it is a "slightly" weighted coin.SSOG said:
I'm not holding Peterson up to anything- you compared him missing 2 games in 3 seasons to Gore missing 5 in 4 (again neglecting 2 more in his rookie season), and all I did was say they aren't similar- Gore has missed more games, a higher percentage of games, and games in more seasons, than AP, that's all I'm saying. You were trying to say that AP has been just as injury prone as Gore, which just hasn't been the case.
Again, you brought the study into the discussion, I'm just pointing out that it actually hurts your argument since it shows the odds are slightly worse, not better. The difference isn't large, but it still doesn't help your cause.
If every RB suffers them, how come they haven't caused guys like AP, CJ3, or MJD to miss nearly as much time, or to miss time nearly as often? I agree, "injury prone" is a tough label to pin down, but let's start with a definition of "prone"- having a tendency or inclination : being likely. To me, Gore is more likely to be injured than other RBs that haven't been injured as often. Being injured in 4 out of 5 seasons is more of a tendency than 1 out of 3, whatever the reasons may have been.
One of the things I consider is, how many different injuries does a guy have? Body composition isn't something that is quantifiable, but I believe that some people have weaker/tighter muscles, joints, ligaments, etc. than others, which can lead to several different injuries. For instance, I have bone spurs, and while they haven't lead to any one injury reccuring over and over, it has lead to multiple different injuries- I have them in my shoulder, elbows, knees and heels, and they've been an issue for me at different times over the course of 15 years during my time playing competetive sports. My body composition made me more injury prone than other people who didn't have the same issues (with calcium build up in this case). Same with other things- most times, getting a sprained ankle is just a fluke thing, and you go on your way without ever having more issues. Other times, it's a sign that your ligaments and tendons aren't as strong as others are, and you'll go on to sprain your knees, shoulders, etc. Nothing scientific, no hard data to support it, but there is something to it IMO.
Anyway, we've both wasted way too much time here (especially considering Gore has his own thread!). I like Gore a lot, think he's a top talent, but I also think it's pretty clear he's more of an injury risk than guys like AP, CJ3 and MJD. I'm not discounting him nearly as much as you think either- I have Gore as my #5 RB, it's not like I'm saying it's a guarantee he's going to miss time, or that he's not going to be a top 10 RB. All I'm saying is, he is somewhat more likely to than those other guys, and that's why he's considered just below them. There isn't any rock solid evidence either way, but honestly, you are the one trying to disprove the injury prone label that he has, so the burden of proof should be on you IMO. The study you presented doesn't do that, I don't think anything out there can really, so it pretty much just comes down to opinion. I don't consider every player that misses time injury prone. This is the NFL, it's incredibly violent, injuries are going to happen. But, once it gets to a certain point, I think it's a very tough argument to make that a player isn't more prone to injuries than others. Getting hurt once or twice isn't a red flag. 4 out of 5 meets that criteria for me, especially when you compare him to others that have a better track record.
Last edited by a moderator:
That's the thing- we don't KNOW if Gore is a weighted coin, or if he's a normal coin that just had a string of tails. Using the coin example, let's say that a player's resistance to injury represents the chance of flipping "heads". Even the most durable RBs, the guys who play in 32+ consecutive games, are coins with just a 50% chance of landing on heads. Let's say that the "injury prone guys", on the other hand, only land on heads 33% of the time. A player's "true injury rating" is an absolute concept much like a coin's "true heads%", but it's a value we can't directly measure, so we measure it with indirect evidence- basically, by looking at how often they flip heads. That sounds like a great idea in theory, but if I gave you a fair coin (50% heads) and a weighted coin (33% heads), it'd be impossible to determine one from the other by flipping them 4 times each. If you flipped a coin and got tails 4 times, you'd probably assume that was the weighted coin... but the fair coin has a 6% chance of pulling out four consecutive tails flips (the weighted coin has a 19% chance), so there's a very real and very substantial chance that the coin you're labeling "weighted" is, in all actuality, a fair coin (just like there's a substantial chance that the RB you're calling "injury prone" is, in all actuality, an injury-resistant RB). Similarly, if a coin came up heads three times out of four, you'd assume it was a fair coin, but there's a great chance that it was just the weighted coin on a lucky streak.Now, it's marginally more likely that Gore is in actuality an "injury prone" RB than it is that MJD is an "injury prone" RB, but the odds are both extremely close, and the expected difference is about 10 fantasy points a season. As a result, anyone who gives Frank Gore anything but the mildest possible downgrade because of his injury history is overrating the injury factor in their considerations. In other words, Gore's upgrades (the offensive linemen) far outweigh his downgrades (the wildly overblown injury issue).
My "cause" was never that Gore was *LESS LIKELY* to get injured than any other RB. You originally said that he has a "long history of missing games, which isn't likely to change as he gets older". My "cause" is pointing out that his odds of missing time are very, very close to the odds that ANY RB has of missing time, and that it's not the slightest bit unlikely that that might change as he gets older.
Because splits happen. If I gave you 100 coins and all of them had a 50% chance of coming up heads, odds are if you flipped them all 5 times then several of the coins would come up heads 5 times in a row. That's to be expected when you're dealing with a sample size as large as "every starting RB in the NFL"- some of them are going to avoid injury, and some of them aren't. Splits happen.
In Redraft leagues
Buy:
Ryan Grant, always produces, last 4 games: 6 tds, 5,5 ypc.
Mike Wallace: Maybe his stock is high, but he will be a beast.
Big Ben: Rumors about Leftwich keeping the job are a joke, he will come back and produce like a top 5-7 QB.
Hakeem Nicks: Will be the playmaking WR of this offense.
Eli Manning: Underrated, has all the weapons to be a top 5 QB. Run game isn't good, Eli will have to produce.
Pierre Thomas: Will get more GL carries, and will probably get the late game carries now as well.
Jonathan Stewart: Was a beast in the last 5 games of the season, with 4 Tds, and 4 games over 100 yards. D-Will will get more receptions, but I think Stewart will begin to take more carries away from him.
Hold:
Jamall Charles: You won't get decent value now with TJ and McC, but he could still produce like a RB1/RB2.
Sell:
Donald Driver: Getting older, Finley is coming on and James Jones could be more of a factor.
Devin Aromashadu: Stock is way to high, Hester and Knox project better in that offense.
Reggie Wayne: With Garcon Emerging, I can see Wayne regress a little bit.
Matt Schaub: Has an extremely difficult sched, and his stock is very high right now.
Ben Tate: Everyone loves him in this system, but is he that good? I don't think so.
Buy:
Ryan Grant, always produces, last 4 games: 6 tds, 5,5 ypc.
Mike Wallace: Maybe his stock is high, but he will be a beast.
Big Ben: Rumors about Leftwich keeping the job are a joke, he will come back and produce like a top 5-7 QB.
Hakeem Nicks: Will be the playmaking WR of this offense.
Eli Manning: Underrated, has all the weapons to be a top 5 QB. Run game isn't good, Eli will have to produce.
Pierre Thomas: Will get more GL carries, and will probably get the late game carries now as well.
Jonathan Stewart: Was a beast in the last 5 games of the season, with 4 Tds, and 4 games over 100 yards. D-Will will get more receptions, but I think Stewart will begin to take more carries away from him.
Hold:
Jamall Charles: You won't get decent value now with TJ and McC, but he could still produce like a RB1/RB2.
Sell:
Donald Driver: Getting older, Finley is coming on and James Jones could be more of a factor.
Devin Aromashadu: Stock is way to high, Hester and Knox project better in that offense.
Reggie Wayne: With Garcon Emerging, I can see Wayne regress a little bit.
Matt Schaub: Has an extremely difficult sched, and his stock is very high right now.
Ben Tate: Everyone loves him in this system, but is he that good? I don't think so.
I like to debate as much as the next guy, but it's kind of pointless when we aren't agreeing on the base assumptions- you're assuming that a players propensity to get injured is a random flip of the coin, and I disagree- I think every player has their own odds at getting hurt, not the same odds just because they're an NFL RB, so they all have their own weighted coin. It might be because of body composition, training routine, diet, the shoes that they wear, or any number of reasons, but I don't agree with the assumption that every RB that steps on the NFL field is equally at risk to get injured.
We'll never "know". You could flip the coin 20 times, and if it comes up tails 19 times, that doesn't prove that it's a weighted coin- it's highly unlikely, but it is possible for that to happen with a true coin. You could make the case that a player that missed time in all 10 of his NFL seasons just had "bad luck" 10 straight times. I call them "more injury prone". Likewise, a player that rarely or never misses time with injury could just be called "lucky". I call them "less injury prone".
The reason I said Gore was a weighted coin was because, in that study, his grouping of players who played 13-15 games had a 40% chance at playing all 16 games the following season. If you bought into the coin flip theory, his groupings coin would be weighted 60/40 towards not playing a full season. Obviously, any given player within that grouping can be weighted higher or lower than that, which is another reason why the data is kind of useless.
Can't prove either of our cases with any amount of data, so let's just agree to disagree.
We'll never "know". You could flip the coin 20 times, and if it comes up tails 19 times, that doesn't prove that it's a weighted coin- it's highly unlikely, but it is possible for that to happen with a true coin. You could make the case that a player that missed time in all 10 of his NFL seasons just had "bad luck" 10 straight times. I call them "more injury prone". Likewise, a player that rarely or never misses time with injury could just be called "lucky". I call them "less injury prone".
The reason I said Gore was a weighted coin was because, in that study, his grouping of players who played 13-15 games had a 40% chance at playing all 16 games the following season. If you bought into the coin flip theory, his groupings coin would be weighted 60/40 towards not playing a full season. Obviously, any given player within that grouping can be weighted higher or lower than that, which is another reason why the data is kind of useless.
Can't prove either of our cases with any amount of data, so let's just agree to disagree.
