Site Projections Posted (1 Viewer)

[Liquid Tension]

My first cut of these things

All criticism welcome here on these. I have about 40 hours into these numbers, but I am sure I have some things that don't make any sense at all.

Jason Wood has also released his numbers.

PK and Def projections will be coming within days and then we will move on to the VBD and DRaft Dominator (likely by the middle of next week)

wondering how you came to the conclusion that Portis is only good for the 8th best RB in the NFL this season?!with games against Rams, Lions, Bucs, Panthers, Chiefs, Falcons, Broncos, Saints, Raiders, I'm trying to understand how you could rank Portis any lower than MJD @ #2?!

the guy should easily rack up at least 140 rush yards against each of the Rams, Lions, Chiefs, Saints, Broncos..700 yards.

another 100 ( minimum) against Bucs, Panthers, Falcons..1000 yards so far..then at least 80 per game vs. Cowboys/Giants/Eagles. another 480 for a total of 1480 yards. and that is the low end of the stick. take a look at his averages against these three teams since he was traded to Washington...he does exteremely well in the NFC East..

the only way he finishes with less that 1500 rush yards this season, is if he gets hurt , something he never does. the guy is a rock..

I think his totals are closer to 1700 rushing yards in what could be his finest season in the NFL.

Stevey Jackson at #4 is way too high, IMO..you're asking Sjax to do some things he's only done once during his career: rush for more than 1200 yards in a single season, catch more than 43 balls, play a full 16-game schedule, injury free.

I highly doubt it happens. The guy runs upright, loves to deliver hits to opposing defenders, has a lousy O-line, and he plays for a bad team..not many RB's have finished a season as the 4th best RB while playing for a terrible, losing team..

winning NFL teams and RB's with great stats, usually go hand-in-hand.

Love the Slaton ranking although he's still probably too low! this guy is going to be a stud for Houston!

you might be too low on Brandon Jacobs, Forte, Ronnie Brown, Pierre Thomas, D. Ward.

and finally, I'd be shocked if Moreno finished with the statline you're expecting, 225/1013/8?

with 7 RB's on that Denver roster, a HC who is in love with RBBC, no QB to speak of, no defense, and a new coaching staff, I wonder how Moreno will even get 1/2 of those stats you're projecting him for, especially with games against Philly,NY, Balt, NE, Giants, SD (2x), Washington,Dallas, Pitt, Chicago...just how is he going to get 1,000 yards when he plays these defenses, not to mention the 8-man fronts he'll see all year long..

Denver is the one team most likely to finish in the bottom 5 in time of possession, rush yards, total yards from scrimmage,

wins, etc. They should easily be one of the 5 worst teams in the NFL.

took a quick look at your QB rankings, they look dead-on! you're a believer in Cutler in Chicago!

the ranking of Romo is perfect at #9..he might be even lower than that without T.O.

WR's look great, Bowe might be a tad low..he should finish with double-digit TDs.

Re: PortisHe hasn't rushed for 1500 yards since 2005, but he should be projected for a minimum of that now? Nothing wrong with a 1300 yard projection.

Re: S. Jackson

It boils down to this: nobody can predict injuries. Jackson has only played in 16 games once in 5 years, then 15, 14, 12, and 12 games. For comparison, let's look at your iron man, Portis, in his first 5 seasons: 16, 13, 15, 16, 8. Not that different, huh? Heck, Jackson has played in more games through 5 seasons than Portis did!

Jackson produced 1400 yards and 8 TDs in 12 games on a wretched team with a wretched line. That was good for #3 RB on a ppg basis... so if you can't predict injuries, and a guy produces at a very high level when he plays, where should he be ranked? Ranking Jackson out of the top 5 or 6 is just another way of saying he is definitely getting hurt. You may believe that, but there are MANY examples of players that had a few injuries that went on to have numerour injury-free seasons.

And your statement about his # of catches is absurd. Cherry pick stats much? What is magical about 43? He has caught "over" 37 every year as a starter.Jackson caught 40 and 38 balls in 12 games each of the last two years... but he won't catch 43 this year?

Heck, Jackson had 1400 combined yards in 12 games last year.... Dodds is only projecting about 1600 this year. Jackson may well reach that in 13-14 games, let alone 16 games.

All that aside, less than 2 ppg separate the #4 RB from the #11 RB. Don't get caught up in the rankings, pay attention to the projections.

"you might be too low on Brandon Jacobs, Forte, Ronnie Brown, Pierre Thomas, D. Ward."

Okay, so Jackson gets pummeled because he has had two different injuries in the last two years.... but Jacobs doesn't?!?!? Jackson gets a thumbs-down due to running style, but not Jacobs? They had almost identical ppg in 2007, and Jackson had a higher ppg last year.

It's a good thing Ronnie Brown doesn't miss games with injuries (1 full season out of 4).

It's a good thing Ward doesn't get injured. Ward's injuries

Apply the same logic to all the players and don't just give your personal favorites a pass for reasons that you condemn other players for.

 

[moleculo]

well, the next bit of critical info then is how wide the ranges are. What you have above is (hopefully) a normally distributed set of data centered around 4.58 YPC which is great. I'm sure that there is a corresponding sigma with this distribution as well. But, not everyone will have an equivalent sigma, which means that the effective floors and ceilings for all of the projections will vary. This variation could also be modeled and accounted for as a risk factor somehow.

Yes, Brandon Jacobs has a wider range than LaDainian Tomlinson (projected mean = 4.50):4.9 - 0.0334%4.8 - 0.7751%4.7 - 6.6109%4.6 - 26.2005%4.5 - 38.1229%4.4 - 22.5529%4.3 - 5.1982%4.2 - 0.4919%4.1 - 0.0137%Tomlinson has 2657 career rushes, so we pretty much know what we're getting with him (if he maintains his health). Jacobs has 554 rushes, which is enough to conclude that he is pretty certainly not a complete fluke, but we still don't know exactly what we're getting with the same level of certainty (in both directions -- upside and downside). So he's got a wider range.(Note that those percentages aren't supposed to describe the possibilities for 2009's 300 or so carries -- that would have a larger range. Rather, they're supposed to describe his YPC in 2009 if he got a number of carries approaching infinity without wearing down, i.e., if we ran the 2009 season a few hundred thousand times, what would his overall average be?)

If you are reporting the mean numbers then, variance plays no role in the final reported numbers - the width of the spread isn't accounted for, just the central value (mean).It looks to me like you are leaving some data on the table - you could take this data further and report something to indicate consistent vs boom/bust performers. I personally think that managing this is a key to success - if your team is full of consistent, mediocre guys, you will win 1/2 your games and probably miss the playoffs. If your team is 100% boom/bust type of guys, chances are 50/50 that you will be awesome, but you could also be a dud. I believe managing a mix of these types of guys on your team is key for season-long success.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

If you are reporting the mean numbers then, variance plays no role in the final reported numbers - the width of the spread isn't accounted for, just the central value (mean).

It looks to me like you are leaving some data on the table - you could take this data further and report something to indicate consistent vs boom/bust performers.

Right -- there's a lot less information in the final projections than all the information that went into making them. There's a trade-off between being able to summarize everything in an easily-viewable table and writing a long essay on each player weighing different risk factors and scenarios, etc.At FBG, we do both.

The projections are what they are -- an easily viewable table -- but they're not the be-all, end-all of fantasy draft preparation.

I personally think that managing this is a key to success - if your team is full of consistent, mediocre guys, you will win 1/2 your games and probably miss the playoffs. If your team is 100% boom/bust type of guys, chances are 50/50 that you will be awesome, but you could also be a dud. I believe managing a mix of these types of guys on your team is key for season-long success.

It makes sense to take fewer risks in the early rounds and more risk in the later rounds, IMO. (See the section on "Risk Management" here.)

 

[moleculo]

If you are reporting the mean numbers then, variance plays no role in the final reported numbers - the width of the spread isn't accounted for, just the central value (mean).

It looks to me like you are leaving some data on the table - you could take this data further and report something to indicate consistent vs boom/bust performers.

Right -- there's a lot less information in the final projections than all the information that went into making them. There's a trade-off between being able to summarize everything in an easily-viewable table and writing a long essay on each player weighing different risk factors and scenarios, etc.At FBG, we do both.

The projections are what they are -- an easily viewable table -- but they're not the be-all, end-all of fantasy draft preparation.

I personally think that managing this is a key to success - if your team is full of consistent, mediocre guys, you will win 1/2 your games and probably miss the playoffs. If your team is 100% boom/bust type of guys, chances are 50/50 that you will be awesome, but you could also be a dud. I believe managing a mix of these types of guys on your team is key for season-long success.

It makes sense to take fewer risks in the early rounds and more risk in the later rounds, IMO. (See the section on "Risk Management" here.)

so would it be possible to have some place where you present variances for various players? I'd definitely find that interesting.Right now, I have no way to account for this, other than "gut feel" come draft day. perceived risk is one many factors that causes me to skip the top guy on my projection-derived VBD cheet-sheet...I'd love for there to be a better way to quantify.

 

[gheemony]

1. I love Maurile's way of looking at things. When do we get Maurile'a projections?

2. I really think the next step is to add a little more information to the nice, clean list of projections. Adding variance is one way, but may be too complicated for most to understand. Some other suggestions:

Min and max: not sure this can be easily done unless you're running multiple sims (see how FootballOutsiders arrive at their projections).

Median: this would give some sense of the range and variability (I would compare the mean to the median).

% likelihood of exceeding mean projection: I think Baseball Prospectus does something like this. Would helpevaluate the upside and downside risk of each player.

I think Maurile could do this...

 

[Tau837]

Thanks DD! It's going to be odd that this is the one that immediately stuck out in my mind, but w/e:Malcom Floyd SD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 16 194 12.1 3 37.4 Seems pretty low to me, imho. Reasoning?

I agree with this. Looking at the Chargers' passing game...1. First, a general comment. I wish the projections included projected targets and projected sacks.2. I guess you may have a general approach that leads you to give some number of passing attempts to the backup QB. But I would bet a fair amount of money on the under for Volek to get 15 passing attempts this season. The Chargers' backup QB has gotten a total of 12 passing attempts in the 3 regular seasons (48 games) since Rivers took over as starter, including 0 passing attempts last year. This continues the trend Rivers established in college, when he started an NCAA record 51 of 51 possible games. If you were ever to project a QB to get all of his team's attempts, Rivers is the guy.3. I think Rivers' projected interceptions are slightly high. His career interception percentage is 2.5%, and he was at 2.3% last season. He is projected here for 2.7%. Not a big deal, as a reduction from 13 to 12 would put him at 2.5% based on 480 attempts. Personally, I'd project him at 11 on 480 attempts, or 12 on 500+ attempts (see below).4. I'm interested in the rationale for projecting Rivers to drop from 34 passing TDs to 27. Is it just regression to the mean? How much weight is given to the 21 TDs in 2007 and 22 TDs in 2006? I'd argue that things have changed quite a bit since then, making last season a more valid predictor. The targets (Jackson, Chambers, Floyd, Gates, LT, Sproles) are quite a bit better now than they were in 2006 & 2007... and Rivers is much better with 3 seasons as a starter under his belt... and LT is in at least mild decline, meaning the Chargers should be slowly shifting their pass/run ratio more to the pass going forward. And 2006 was under Marty and Rivers' first year as starter (read: conservative passing game), while 2007 required an adjustment to Norv. I get that projecting 27 TDs is projecting a lot, so maybe it's just hard to project more than that without extraordinary circumstances. But I'd bet the over for Rivers this season.5. Last year, the Chargers offense only ran 924 plays. Only 3 teams (Browns, Raiders, Lions) ran fewer. In 2007, they ran 980. In 2006, they ran 1016, though I put less stock in that season since Rivers was a first year starter and Marty was head coach, so the offensive playcalling was presumably quite different. Sacks are not projected here, so I'm unsure how many total offensive plays are being projected. There are 480 passing attempts and 445 rushing attempts shown, so if sacks are projected to be similar to last season (25), this would yield 950 offensive plays. IMO this is probably considerably low.Last season, the Chargers RBs averaged 4.0 ypc, and they are projected for 4.4 ypc this year. But consider that Tomlinson played hurt all of last season, and is presumably projected to be healthy this year. So this increase is logical, since the Chargers RBs averaged 4.5 ypc in 2007. This projected increase over last year presumably would result in at least a few more first downs, and thus more plays.Last season, Rivers averaged 8.4 ypa. He is being projected here for "only" 7.7 ypa. This brings us back to the number of offensive plays. IMO there are two reasons the Chargers ran such a low number of plays last season. First, they hit on a lot of long gains, including a number of long scores, which shortened a lot of their scoring drives. Second, their defense regressed significantly last season - in 2008, they were #25 in yards allowed, compared to #15 in 2007 and #10 in 2006... so they presumably allowed their opponents a lot more time of possession, thus preventing the Chargers offense from running more plays. IMO the defense should be better with better health, notably Merriman's return. Most importantly, IMO dropping Rivers' ypa by such a substantive amount implies that there will be more plays run, since it implies fewer long scores. This is also implied by the projection for 7 fewer passing TDs than last season.I think the Chargers offense will run more like 980-1000 plays. Because of LT's age and recent injury issues, plus the impressive performance by the Chargers passing game last year, I suspect most of those extra plays (above the ~950 projected here) will be pass attempts. So that means 25-40 more pass attempts IMO than are projected here. That implies another 15-25 completions with corresponding yards and TDs.6. So that brings us to the receivers (of all types).Once again, maybe it's just really hard to justify projecting a RB ypr above 8.7 ypr, but Sproles averaged 11.8 ypr last year, and is incredibly explosive in space. I could see him doing more with his catches than is projected here. In fact, it is interesting how much of a drop in receiving production is projected here for the RBs as a group. Last year, they combined for 107/1032/8 (9.6 ypr), and here they are only projected for 87/699/4 (8.0 ypr). Seems like quite a drop. Looks like those catches were shifted to the WRs, but given more plays, I'd bump these back up to the 105-110 area, and I also think the production will be a bit better than is projected here, even if only because Sproles will be better than projected.I can't quibble too much on the TEs. It isn't clear at this point if Gates' toe is fully healed. It wouldn't surprise me if he beats his projections, but they seem reasonable at this point.As for the WRs, I don't get the projection of a collective 13.9 ypr. Last season, they combined for 16.4 ypr. In 2007, they averaged 13.8 ypr and in 2006 they averaged 14.0 ypr. So this projection apparently does not account for any improvement by Rivers, Jackson, Chambers, and Floyd since 2006/2007. This really does not seem logical to me.As for Floyd specifically, I was really impressed with him last year. I wouldn't be surprised at all to see him surpass Chambers this year. At minimum, I expect him to cut into Chambers' targets, and he might eventually take the starting spot. Having the height and athleticism in Gates, Jackson, and Floyd all on the field together makes for a really tough set of matchups for the opposing defense. Regardless, last season Floyd had 27/465/4 (17.2 ypc) on just 37 targets, and he was playing really well before he got hurt. I can't imagine him getting roughly half that production this year if healthy, but that's how he is projected here.

 

[Tau837]

All of that previous post was based on David's projections. I just looked at Woodrow's. LOL at these projections:

1. Floyd with 5 catches. (And all WRs other than Chambers & Jackson with a total of 9 catches.)

2. Chambers with 69/1125/8 (16.3 ypr), especially compared to Jackson at 46/650/6 (14.1 ypr). (I think many people are too high on Jackson, but I'd be very surprised if Chambers outperforms him.)

IMO Woodrow also looks light on offensive plays, though he is projecting about 10 more than David. And Jason is projecting worse number for Rivers than David: lower completion percentage; lower ypa; fewer TDs. IMO Rivers will outperform both projections.

 

[David Dodds]

Outstanding input everyone. I thought through everything that was posted here (with most ending up in tweaks).

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

2. I guess you may have a general approach that leads you to give some number of passing attempts to the backup QB. But I would bet a fair amount of money on the under for Volek to get 15 passing attempts this season. The Chargers' backup QB has gotten a total of 12 passing attempts in the 3 regular seasons (48 games) since Rivers took over as starter, including 0 passing attempts last year. This continues the trend Rivers established in college, when he started an NCAA record 51 of 51 possible games. If you were ever to project a QB to get all of his team's attempts, Rivers is the guy.

Rivers will sit out week 17, and it will have nothing to do with injury. On a more serious note, ACLs don't differentiate between the regular season and the post-season. As was proven a couple post-seasons ago, Rivers' ACL isn't indestructible. Rivers has a non-zero chance of missing time this season. He even has a non-zero chance of missing all 16 games (or missing 15.75 like Brady did). To me, 15 pass attempts for Volek seems low -- if the projection is a mean expectation rather than an over/under.(If there's an 50% chance Volek will get zero pass attempts this season, a 40% chance he'll get 1-20 attempts, a 5% chance he'll get 21-100 attempts, a 4% chance he'll get 101-300 attempts, and a 1% chance he'll get 300+ attempts -- his expected number of pass attempts would be around 20 while the over/under on his pass attempts would be around 0.5. So it's not always appropriate to think of the projections as over/unders.)

 

[Tau837]

2. I guess you may have a general approach that leads you to give some number of passing attempts to the backup QB. But I would bet a fair amount of money on the under for Volek to get 15 passing attempts this season. The Chargers' backup QB has gotten a total of 12 passing attempts in the 3 regular seasons (48 games) since Rivers took over as starter, including 0 passing attempts last year. This continues the trend Rivers established in college, when he started an NCAA record 51 of 51 possible games. If you were ever to project a QB to get all of his team's attempts, Rivers is the guy.

Rivers will sit out week 17, and it will have nothing to do with injury. On a more serious note, ACLs don't differentiate between the regular season and the post-season. As was proven a couple post-seasons ago, Rivers' ACL isn't indestructible. Rivers has a non-zero chance of missing time this season. He even has a non-zero chance of missing all 16 games (or missing 15.75 like Brady did). To me, 15 pass attempts for Volek seems low -- if the projection is a mean expectation rather than an over/under.(If there's an 50% chance Volek will get zero pass attempts this season, a 40% chance he'll get 1-20 attempts, a 5% chance he'll get 21-100 attempts, a 4% chance he'll get 101-300 attempts, and a 1% chance he'll get 300+ attempts -- his expected number of pass attempts would be around 20 while the over/under on his pass attempts would be around 0.5. So it's not always appropriate to think of the projections as over/unders.)

Yes, I get that an ACL injury can happen to anyone. But I also think it is not possible to project an ACL injury. And projecting Volek for 15 pass attempts does not account for any serious injury to Rivers anyway... it's half a game's attempts. So I don't really understand the point of a 465/15 split based on your type of example split above. Knowing Rivers, it would take a major injury to keep him out of a game. A major injury likely equates to a lot more than 15 attempts for Volek. But who can project a major injury anyway?What do you think about the rest of my post?

 

[Jason Wood]

All of that previous post was based on David's projections. I just looked at Woodrow's. LOL at these projections:

1. Floyd with 5 catches. (And all WRs other than Chambers & Jackson with a total of 9 catches.)

2. Chambers with 69/1125/8 (16.3 ypr), especially compared to Jackson at 46/650/6 (14.1 ypr). (I think many people are too high on Jackson, but I'd be very surprised if Chambers outperforms him.)

IMO Woodrow also looks light on offensive plays, though he is projecting about 10 more than David. And Jason is projecting worse number for Rivers than David: lower completion percentage; lower ypa; fewer TDs. IMO Rivers will outperform both projections.

Couple of things...1) The Chambers/Jackson thing was a case of the IDs being swapped in the database when I submitted projections. The Chambers projections = Jackson and vice versa

2) I don't disagree that the WRs outside of Chambers and Jackson will catch more than 15 receptions, but I'm struggling to find where to take away to get them there; I honestly don't see either Tomlinson or Sproles as likely to catch fewer than 40 passes

3) I have the Chargers with 935 offensive plays, in line with their 2007 tallies and about 30 off their 6-year average. I'm not opposed to raising that a bit actually, thanks for point it out

4) I like Rivers quite a bit and would be fine with having him as my QB1, but I don't think my projections are way off the mark. Rivers' ANY/A was 7.4 last year, a full 1.2 yards more than his career average. I expect some regression there, especially if you're going to talk me into raising the team's overall offensive snaps. I suspect Rivers will throw more to his RBs and TEs this year, and hardly think projecting him with a 7.5 YPA is selling him short. I also have him 4th in the league with 26 TD passes, let's not make it out to be I'm expecting him to fall off a cliff here.

I think a little historical precedent is in order here...

Prior to the 2008 season, there had bee 57 30-TD seasons in NFL history. Of those, care to guess how many followed that with ANOTHER 30 TD season?

12 out of 57 [21%]

Of of those 12, five of them were Brett Favre. In all SEVEN (7) QBs in NFL history threw for 30 TDs in a season and then did it again in the following year.

Now let's look at how many of these QBs threw for 25+ TDs in the following year.

24 out of 57 [42%]

Now we're starting to get into what one would call reasonable expectations of performance. When you factor in those QBs who got hurt in the year after they threw 30 TDs, we're now looking at better than 50% probability that a 30 TD passer will throw 25 TDs the following year.

I have Rivers throwing 26

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Yes, I get that an ACL injury can happen to anyone. But I also think it is not possible to project an ACL injury. And projecting Volek for 15 pass attempts does not account for any serious injury to Rivers anyway... it's half a game's attempts. So I don't really understand the point of a 465/15 split based on your type of example split above. Knowing Rivers, it would take a major injury to keep him out of a game. A major injury likely equates to a lot more than 15 attempts for Volek. But who can project a major injury anyway?

You don't have to project either 0 or 1 ACL injuries. You can project 0.01 ACL injuries -- i.e., a 1% chance of one. On average, ACL injuries happen in week 9. If Rivers injures his knee in week 9, Volek would get about 250 pass attempts. So that's a projection of 25 pass attempts for Volek.(One percent is high, but realistically, we're not just talking about torn ACLs. We're talking about torn rotator cuffs, dislocated elbows, and perhaps most importantly in Rivers' case, sitting out when the team has already locked up its playoff seed.)

On average, if a QB has started 32 out of 32 games during the previous two seasons, he will start 12.9 games the next season. It makes no sense to say anybody has a 0% chance to miss playing time.

Moreover, as a practical matter, let's say 28 NFL QBs have a solid grip on the starting position. They'll only miss time with a major injury, and we can't predict those. If we want to rank the top 40 fantasy QBs, whom do we put at #37? Everyone from #37 on down will be projected to have zero statistics, so we can't differentiate among them based on statistics. The better practice, for both theoretical and practical reasons, IMO, is to give all backup QBs a non-zero chance of taking a bunch of snaps -- i.e., to project them to take some snaps.

What do you think about the rest of my post?

I'm pretty close to Dodds on my Charger projections, so all of your complaints about his projections will apply to mine as well.Projecting 27 passing TDs is a lot. I think Brees, P.Manning, Brady, Warner, Romo, and Rivers are all decently likely to hit that number, but I'm not sure any of them are more than 50% likely to hit it in 15 games (which is how many games I have each of them projected for). It's certainly not an insult to project a QB for 27 TDs -- or for 7.7 YPA, for that matter. Or a 2-1 or better TD-INT ratio.

I'm between you and Dodds on total plays. I'm projecting 968 right now (including 25 sacks).

I agree with you that it'd be cool if projected targets were viewable.

I have fewer passes going to the WRs as a group than Dodds does, but my ratios are somewhat similar. (A little less to Chambers, a little more to Floyd; but not a big deal.)

 

[Tau837]

1) The Chambers/Jackson thing was a case of the IDs being swapped in the database when I submitted projections. The Chambers projections = Jackson and vice versa

That makes better sense. IMO you have Jackson projected too high, but this is still better than how it appeared with Chambers and Jackson reversed.

2) I don't disagree that the WRs outside of Chambers and Jackson will catch more than 15 receptions, but I'm struggling to find where to take away to get them there; I honestly don't see either Tomlinson or Sproles as likely to catch fewer than 40 passes

Agreed on LT and Sproles. IMO the issue is that your completions are too low, because (1) Rivers will complete better than 62.5% of his passes and (2) Rivers will attempt more than 480 passes.I realize Rivers' career completion percentage is 62.3%. However:

1. He had better targets last year than in prior years, and it showed.

2. Last year was the first time he wasn't in a conservative offense (Marty 2006) or adjusting to a new offense (Norv 2007). It makes sense IMO that his numbers last year have much more predictive value for 2009.

3. Obviously, Rivers now has 3 seasons of starting experience. When he completed lower percentages in 2006 & 2007, he was less experienced.

IMO he will attempt more than 480 passes because your projection of plays for the Chargers offense is too low (see below).

3) I have the Chargers with 935 offensive plays, in line with their 2007 tallies and about 30 off their 6-year average. I'm not opposed to raising that a bit actually, thanks for point it out

We may not be talking about the same thing. You are projecting 455 rushing attempts and 480 pass attempts. That is 935 offensive plays. It is unclear if you project sacks, since they aren't shown. Last year, the Chargers allowed 25 sacks, and in 2007 they allowed 24.Last year, the Chargers had 924 offensive plays, which broke down as follows: 478 passing attempts, 25 sacks, and 421 rushing attempts. In 2007, they had 980 offensive plays, which broke down as follows: 471 passing attempts, 24 sacks, and 485 rushing attempts.

So your projection of 935 offensive plays is not in line with 2007, unless you are projecting 45 sacks... and if you are, I'd like to hear your rationale for that.

Furthermore, the Chargers' 6 year average of offensive plays is 985... not 935. Not sure where you were getting that number. They have averaged allowing 26 sacks per season over that span, but that is only about half the difference.

Looks to me like you are short by about 20 plays if you were striving to match 2007, and 25 plays if you were striving to match their 6 year average. But why does the 6 year average matter in this case? 6 years ago Tomlinson was in his prime... now he is not... 6 years ago, the Chargers were coached by Marty, not Norv... 6 years ago, most of the offensive personnel were different...

4) I like Rivers quite a bit and would be fine with having him as my QB1, but I don't think my projections are way off the mark. Rivers' ANY/A was 7.4 last year, a full 1.2 yards more than his career average. I expect some regression there, especially if you're going to talk me into raising the team's overall offensive snaps. I suspect Rivers will throw more to his RBs and TEs this year, and hardly think projecting him with a 7.5 YPA is selling him short. I also have him 4th in the league with 26 TD passes, let's not make it out to be I'm expecting him to fall off a cliff here.

On the bolded statement, can you justify this? Last year, Rivers threw to his RBs 138 times (targets), which was ~29% of the time. He threw to his TEs 111 times (targets), which was ~23% of the time. Why do you think he will target RBs and TEs more than 52% of the time? I would venture to say that is a pretty high percentage for RB/TE targets around the league. It is true that in 2007 he targeted RBs/TEs ~55% of the time, but IMO his WRs have really improved since then, and that is unlikely to be repeated.Regardless, you are projecting Rivers for 7.5 ypa. Rivers averaged 7.5 ypa on his targets to his RBs and TEs last season, so it doesn't seem like reason to drop your projection. It seems that what you are really doing in your projections is dropping his ypa to his WRs. Last season, Rivers averaged 9.8 ypa on his targets to his WRs. Targets aren't included in the projections, but it seems you must be assuming a lower ypa on the WR targets, not on the RB/TE targets. This is reinforced by the fact that his WRs collectively averaged 16.4 ypr last year, and you are projecting 15.0.

I think a little historical precedent is in order here...

Prior to the 2008 season, there had bee 57 30-TD seasons in NFL history. Of those, care to guess how many followed that with ANOTHER 30 TD season?

12 out of 57 [21%]

Of of those 12, five of them were Brett Favre. In all SEVEN (7) QBs in NFL history threw for 30 TDs in a season and then did it again in the following year.

Now let's look at how many of these QBs threw for 25+ TDs in the following year.

24 out of 57 [42%]

Now we're starting to get into what one would call reasonable expectations of performance. When you factor in those QBs who got hurt in the year after they threw 30 TDs, we're now looking at better than 50% probability that a 30 TD passer will throw 25 TDs the following year.

I have Rivers throwing 26

Frankly, I care very little about this. First off, I assume a fair number of those QBs missed time in the following season, and I've already made it clear that I think (1) Rivers is as or more likely than any other QB to not miss time and (2) it is foolish to attempt to predict injuries. And there are other things that may have happened to some of those QBs, like coaching changes or changes or injuries to skill position players; there is no reason to believe any of those things will happen to Rivers at this point.Furthermore, you have projected 26 TDs. You could have projected 27-29 and still stayed below your magical 30 TD threshold.

Look, I realize I have long been the biggest Rivers supporter on this board for years. I just think when it comes to projecting him, all signs are positive and merit a stronger projection than what you have projected. And I think at some point people are going to look back and wonder why it wasn't obvious the Chargers passing game deserved stronger projections.

 

[Tau837]

Yes, I get that an ACL injury can happen to anyone. But I also think it is not possible to project an ACL injury. And projecting Volek for 15 pass attempts does not account for any serious injury to Rivers anyway... it's half a game's attempts. So I don't really understand the point of a 465/15 split based on your type of example split above. Knowing Rivers, it would take a major injury to keep him out of a game. A major injury likely equates to a lot more than 15 attempts for Volek. But who can project a major injury anyway?

You don't have to project either 0 or 1 ACL injuries. You can project 0.01 ACL injuries -- i.e., a 1% chance of one. On average, ACL injuries happen in week 9. If Rivers injures his knee in week 9, Volek would get about 250 pass attempts. So that's a projection of 25 pass attempts for Volek.(One percent is high, but realistically, we're not just talking about torn ACLs. We're talking about torn rotator cuffs, dislocated elbows, and perhaps most importantly in Rivers' case, sitting out when the team has already locked up its playoff seed.)

On average, if a QB has started 32 out of 32 games during the previous two seasons, he will start 12.9 games the next season. It makes no sense to say anybody has a 0% chance to miss playing time.

Moreover, as a practical matter, let's say 28 NFL QBs have a solid grip on the starting position. They'll only miss time with a major injury, and we can't predict those. If we want to rank the top 40 fantasy QBs, whom do we put at #37? Everyone from #37 on down will be projected to have zero statistics, so we can't differentiate among them based on statistics. The better practice, for both theoretical and practical reasons, IMO, is to give all backup QBs a non-zero chance of taking a bunch of snaps -- i.e., to project them to take some snaps.

I understand what you're doing here, I just don't agree with it. I don't think it has value. It is so unlikely that Rivers will miss time that you might as well project him for playing 16 full games. And what difference does 15 attempts really make? It would only seem to matter if you project a player to miss a couple game or more.

 

[Shark Attack]

Outstanding input everyone. I thought through everything that was posted here (with most ending up in tweaks).

and you keep tweaking David...its those tweaks that ultimately make your projections some of the best out here.

 

[aldelgreco]

nicely done.

that first one seems like it would be tough as can be. agree with a lot of it, disagree with a lot of it.

 

[Jason Wood]

nicely done.that first one seems like it would be tough as can be. agree with a lot of it, disagree with a lot of it.

Please don't be shy about expressing where you agree and disagree; that's how we improve our iterations.

 

[Jason Wood]

What do you guys think about Buffalo this year? Edwards has a lot to like even though he was forced to not take many shots last year. With Owens in town, that gives him not one but two excellent WRs who can get deep. I really am having a hard time not seeing Edwards as a guy that will slot in the 10-12 range if he stays healthy; and that shocks me b/c I wouldn't have thought I would have him that high before I did my projections.

 

[Biabreakable]

What do you guys think about Buffalo this year? Edwards has a lot to like even though he was forced to not take many shots last year. With Owens in town, that gives him not one but two excellent WRs who can get deep. I really am having a hard time not seeing Edwards as a guy that will slot in the 10-12 range if he stays healthy; and that shocks me b/c I wouldn't have thought I would have him that high before I did my projections.

I like Edwards a lot and I think he is the long term solution for Buffalo at QB.I haven't started projecting for them yet so I am not sure where he will end up being when that is done but I do think a low QB1 is possible. If not Edwards should still be a high QB2.My greatest concern is their offensive line. I am thinking they had some one in mind to take Peters place (why they traded him and drafted no one at tackle to replace him) but I have no idea who that is.