The eerie statistical similarities between LT and Marshall Faulk (1 Viewer)

[kethnaab]

So leading into 2008, most people have LT as their #1 pick, right?

Just providing this for informational purposes as I found it rather interesting. It implies nothing, although gives one reason to pause simply because a statistical analysis of their careers provides some pretty crazy similarities.

For reference purposes, we will use 2007 for LT and 2001 for Marshall Faulk as the "baseline" years for reasons which will become obvious.

1) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had gained 14,889/14,025 yards on 2703/2823 touches.

2) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had amassed 2149/2177 fantasy points in their careers

3) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had been the #1 RB for 2 consecutive seasons and had been top 3 RB for 4 consecutive seasons

4) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had been a top 7 RB for 7 seasons in their careers

5) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had 4 seasons with at least 1900 YFS

6) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had 6/7 seasons with > 10 TDs and 2 seasons > 20 TDs

7) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had career averages of 4.4/4.5 YPC, with 2 seasons under 4 YPC and 3/2 seasons > 5 YPC

8) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had 3 consecutive seasons with > 300 fantasy points (non-PPR)

9) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT amassed their best YFS seasons when Faulk became 1 of 2 RBs in NFL history to gain 1000 yards receiving in a season, and LT became 1 of 2 RBs in NFL history to get 100 receptions in a season

10) Leading up to the 2002/2008 seasons, Faulk/LT had 7x 1000-yard rushing seasons and 7x seasons > 1500 YFS

11) Both Faulk and LT set the NFL TD record at the age of 27

12) Both were RB1 in fantasyland that season and the next, at the age of 28

13) The year after they set the TD records, a QB posted one of the best seasons ever (Warner01 and Brady 07)

Now for where it gets weird:

1) Going into 2001/2007, Faulk and LT were widely considered the obvious #1 fantasy football RB choices by just about everyone

2) During 2001/2007, Faulk and LT both experienced a "challenger" that made their status as the obvious #1 FF RB questionable while going into 2002/2008.

3) During 2000/2006, Faulk and LT experienced their high-water marks for fantasy points by setting the NFL TD record

4) During 2001/2007 and 2000/2006, both Faulk and LT were the #1 RB

5) The 2 years prior (1999/2005 and 1998/2004) both Faulk and LT were top-3 RB and top-5 overall

6) Although both were RB1 in the year after they set the TD record, many people considered it an "off-year" because their overall production declined due to a decrease in yardage and TDs.

Yes, there are obvious differences, especially if you nitpick, but the similarities are still pretty striking.

So now that begs the question....with so many similarities between their careers up to this point, will LTs 2008 mirror Faulk's 2002, where he suffered a large dropoff in production due primarily to injury issues? He still finished the season with a "decent" season by most standards, but was far from the fantasy turbostud everyone had come to expect.

 

[FUBAR]

 

[EBF]

I think LT is one of the best backs of all time, but I can't say I'd be too thrilled to take him in the top 3 of a dynasty draft.

 

[Ketamine Dreams]

I think LT is one of the best backs of all time, but I can't say I'd be too thrilled to take him in the top 3 of a dynasty draft.

Agree. I'm not particularly convinced he should go #1 overall in a redraft. He probably should, but I'm still a little hesitant.

 

[EBF]

I think LT is one of the best backs of all time, but I can't say I'd be too thrilled to take him in the top 3 of a dynasty draft.

Agree. I'm not particularly convinced he should go #1 overall in a redraft. He probably should, but I'm still a little hesitant.

Yea, 1.01 in a redraft is not a slam dunk for me this year. I think you can justify 4-5 different guys there.

 

[Ketamine Dreams]

I think LT is one of the best backs of all time, but I can't say I'd be too thrilled to take him in the top 3 of a dynasty draft.

Agree. I'm not particularly convinced he should go #1 overall in a redraft. He probably should, but I'm still a little hesitant.

Yea, 1.01 in a redraft is not a slam dunk for me this year. I think you can justify 4-5 different guys there.

Especially in PPR. LT2, Westy, SJax, ADP, maybe Addai or Gore if you go out on a limb.

 

[LarryAllen'sJockstrap]

The only thing you didn't mention was that in both 2000 and 2001, Marhsall Faulk only played 14 games each season due to knee issues. His knee was already a problem two seasons before his decline began. LT hasn't shown any indication of any type of degenerative injury.

 

[valhallan]

13) The year after they set the TD records, a QB posted one of the best seasons ever (Warner01 and Brady 07)

Weak. The rest is interesting though. Clearly LT has to drop off at some point and these things seem to happen after deep post-season failures (might have to look up the numbers on that).

 

[TommyGilmore]

Also, Faulk had a personal trainer named Tomlinson, and Tomlinson has a personal trainer named Faulk.

 

[Tenacious D]

This reminds of the Lincoln/Kennedy connection.

The only reason to be concerned about LT2 is the same reason to be concerned about any RB knocking on 30, he is simply past the expiration date for your average RB. Every year now is gravy. That said, Faulk's knee problems started back when he was on the Colts and the other knee caught up in 98 and ankle problems surfaced a few years later. By the time he retired, he was in double-digit knee surgeries. I don't believe Tomlinson has ever had knee surgery and the MCL sprain was the first significant leg injury of his career. It's all about the legs.

ETA - ha, TommyGilmore already nailed the Lincoln/Kennedy while was typing

 

[fruity pebbles]

I think LT is one of the best backs of all time, but I can't say I'd be too thrilled to take him in the top 3 of a dynasty draft.

I wouldnt. For me the reasoning is all about value. His value can only go down going forward. Once he turns 30, that's all you're going to hear when discussing a trade involving him. If he starts to falter there is no floor as to how far his value can drop. There's a lot more leniancy given to young guys.

 

[FUBAR]

I think LT is one of the best backs of all time, but I can't say I'd be too thrilled to take him in the top 3 of a dynasty draft.

Agree. I'm not particularly convinced he should go #1 overall in a redraft. He probably should, but I'm still a little hesitant.

Yea, 1.01 in a redraft is not a slam dunk for me this year. I think you can justify 4-5 different guys there.

Especially in PPR. LT2, Westy, SJax, ADP, maybe Addai or Gore if you go out on a limb.

While it's certainly possible that Gore or Addai end up #1 this year, I don't think anyone should be considering them with the top pick. Maybe Addai, as his low-side is pretty high, unless you think Rhodes is a factor. Too much downside with Gore though.

 

[vikingdave]

The only thing you didn't mention was that in both 2000 and 2001, Marhsall Faulk only played 14 games each season due to knee issues. His knee was already a problem two seasons before his decline began. LT hasn't shown any indication of any type of degenerative injury.

Except LT got hurt in the playoffs last year proving he is human...and with his age and wear on him I can see it happening this year...

 

[cstu]

The only thing you didn't mention was that in both 2000 and 2001, Marhsall Faulk only played 14 games each season due to knee issues. His knee was already a problem two seasons before his decline began. LT hasn't shown any indication of any type of degenerative injury.

Except LT got hurt in the playoffs last year proving he is human...and with his age and wear on him I can see it happening this year...

This would be a good place for A Short History of Faulk's Knee

A Short History Of Faulk's Knee

Courtesy of Draftsharks.com

8/17/01

Fantasy football is based on three major factors: Luck, opportunity, and risk. You need to have luck on your side when that running back breaks the plane of the goal line - will the instant replay official rule it a touchdown?

You have to maximize your opportunities, by starting players who enter the red zone constantly in a prolific offensive attack. With the NFL MVP Marshall Faulk on your roster, you're probably going to have a good dose of luck on your side, and plenty of opportunities to mark up TDs on your scoring sheet. But there is that third factor - risk - that no one seems to really mention when Faulk's name comes up. If you want to minimize risk during the 2001 fantasy campaign, perhaps Faulk should not be on your roster this season.

You're thinking, "Blasphemy!" How dare someone bash the league's biggest scoring machine! After all, this is the same Faulk who scored a whopping 26 TDs last season. The same Faulk who had three different 4-TD games last season. The same Faulk who seems to play flanker and tailback at the same time, catching 254 passes in the last 3 years. Yes, the man is all of this, and a bag of chips. But he's also the same man who has at least 1 bum knee -- plain and simple -- and it's going to catch up to him one day.

Go back to the fall of '92, when a 19-year-old Faulk and his San Diego State Aztecs hosted the Miami Hurricanes. He was held out of the game with a sore knee. Miami demolished the Aztecs 65-13. Nothing was ever really said about the injury, because Faulk returned to action the next week and finished the season with 1,630 yards and 15 TDs. He also placed 2nd in the Heisman Trophy voting. All is well.

Two years later, he suited up for the Indianapolis Colts and was the 1994 NFL Offensive Rookie of the Year. But in the fall of '95, Faulk's 2nd pro season, he began appearing on the injury report as 'probable' with a knee injury. Sadly, before week #17 an MRI revealed that Faulk had loose cartilage and floating bodies in his knee - his left knee - and would require surgery to correct it when the season was over. He had the knee drained before the AFC Wildcard game but only managed 1 carry for 16 yards before re-injuring it. On January 5th he gave in to the knee pain and had a major operation involving drilling holes in the bone to stimulate cartilage growth: Recovery time projected to be 4-6 months. His Colts, led by Jim Harbaugh, actually made it to the AFC Championship vs. Pittsburgh without him. Though they lost, the Colts were young on both sides of the ball, and they had a young workhorse who had 2 Pro Bowl selections before his 23rd birthday. All is well.

The January surgery behind him, Faulk worked diligently to get his left knee in shape for the '96 season. He reported soreness in the knee before a preseason game at Houston, and also ended up battling a sprained right foot all year (from favoring that knee?). The result was his worst season in his whole career of football: 198 carries for 587 yards, 3.0 per carry, and only 7 TDs. No one worried, however, and why would they? He was only 24-years old going into '97, his 4th pro season, and his upside was buoyed by a healthier off-season. He logged 1,054 rushing yards, 471 receiving yards, and 8 total TDs. Only no one noticed that he appeared on the injury report as 'probable' or 'questionable' several times, while getting his right, not left, knee scoped before week #4. At least that terrible '96 campaign was ancient history, right? All is well.

In July '98 Faulk banged his right knee in a collision with backup QB Kelly Holcomb. He missed practically the entire camp, but no one noticed because he made it back for the regular season. Training camps and preseason games are like your wedding anniversary: They are hard to remember. Plus, Peyton Manning was in town, so Faulk's knee wasn't the hottest topic in Indianapolis. Faulk compiled 2,227 total yards from scrimmage, and led all NFL RBs with 86 catches. As usual, all is well.

Faulk was traded to the Rams for a 2nd and 5th round pick before the '99 NFL Draft. By this time Marshall was 26, and already entering his 6th season. Amazingly, he had almost 1,700 total touches (carries and catches) under his belt. 1999 was a wonderful season in that Faulk ate up yardage to the tune of 2,429 yards from scrimmage, breaking Barry Sanders' 1997 record of 2,357. His Rams won Super Bowl XXXIV, and again - All is well.

Now we find ourselves in 2001 fantasy draft mode, poring over pages of stats and profiles covering the 2000 season. Faulk's numbers last year need not be rehashed again. Instead, let's focus on what has not been rehashed: His knee problems.

During the 2000 season, while Faulk was scoring TDs, his right knee was growing increasingly sore. By October, Mike Martz said, "It's a chronic situation that continues to be aggravated." He had an MRI that revealed torn scar tissue and an enlarged bruise, in addition to the loose cartilage. Both Faulk and Martz admitted they he had been playing with a sore knee for "most of the season." The torn scar tissue was from "an old injury" according to the doctors. On Sunday, November 5th, Faulk had his knee drained before the Carolina game, but then his knee locked up on him right before kickoff: "He came in and said, `I can't do this,'" Martz said. "For Marshall to say that, you've got to listen to him. If anybody can go, Marshall can go." Well, he couldn't go, and thousands of fantasy footballers had the rug yanked out from under them. It was announced that Justin Watson would start just 2 minutes before kickoff. Ouch.

Faulk would miss the Giants game the next week, but made a near-miraculous comeback and went on to finish with an astounding 2,189 total yards and a record-breaking 26 TDs in only 14 games. All is well, right?

Last March, Faulk met with team doctors, specifically Dr. George Paletta, to discuss the problems this right knee was giving him. "He could feel the cartilage getting hung up in there," Mike Martz said. The "drilling" surgery, like the one Faulk had on his left knee in '96, was suggested immediately. To the dismay of Faulk and the Rams officials, the 4-6 month recovery time would cut into the 2001 season. His other option was to do the usual arthroscopic job, and have the knee smoothed over and the loose bodies removed. Dr. Paletta recommended the major operation, saying, "Without the operation, Faulk is likely to experience rapid wear and tear in the knee." Marshall declined the major operation, and just had the knee scoped out. He missed May's minicamp, but enabled himself to suit up for training camp in July. All is well, for now…

There were reports that Faulk will use an injected knee "lubricant" periodically during the season, in order to alleviate his cartilage problems, or 'lack of', that is. Yikes! That sounds like WD-40 on a rusty bicycle.

On August 1st, Mike Martz said, "Marshall has a slight case of patellar tendinitis, so what we want to do, so that it doesn't get more inflamed, is give him anywhere from 3-7 days off." On August 4th, he had another MRI, this time revealing an enlarged bone bruise on the right knee. On August 6th, Faulk told MNF reporter Eric Dickerson that doctors said he could miss 3 weeks of action with his sore knee. Martz quickly went into spin control, and fired back: "I think what Marshall was referring to is I told him that I didn't want to play him for another 2 or 3 weeks."

What? Is it days or weeks? Now the press is laying hints that his knee is more serious than originally advertised. Plus, it's never good when Coach & Player are not on the same page with an injury. That means there is more to it, and different voices in each of their ears. For instance, Mr. Owner says, "Nah, no major operation - the kid's gotta play, we gotta sell tickets." Mr. Doctor might say, "Sure, but this knee is degenerative and needs attention." It makes you wonder, especially when you know Faulk wants to play, no matter what.

The MVP will be 29 in February, with 7 whole seasons of NFL football behind him. The guy is a warrior, for sure, and might surely fight through his knee problems all season and score another 20+ TDs this season. But given the above evidence, facts, and dialogue, do you really believe that? Study last year's stats well, and fantasize about how Faulk churned out bushels of TDs and thousands of yards, because this year could be quite different. By the way, Faulk opens his season in Philadelphia, and 6 of his first 8 games are on turf. Bottom line for Faulk: All is not well.

2001 was Faulk's final season as a top RB.

 

[kethnaab]

neat.

Made front page. Go me.

 

[identikit]

Also, Faulk had a personal trainer named Tomlinson, and Tomlinson has a personal trainer named Faulk.

This pithy comment isn't getting enough attention.

 

[rzrback77]

Also, Faulk had a personal trainer named Tomlinson, and Tomlinson has a personal trainer named Faulk.

This pithy comment isn't getting enough attention.

o'rly

 

[Despyzer]

The only thing you didn't mention was that in both 2000 and 2001, Marhsall Faulk only played 14 games each season due to knee issues. His knee was already a problem two seasons before his decline began. LT hasn't shown any indication of any type of degenerative injury.

Also, Martz decided that Faulk was no longer the focus of the offense. Some BIG things would have to happen in San Diego for Norv to make a similar decision.

 

[Banger]

Neat stuff but all that info doesn't impact my opinion on LT going forward.

 

[identikit]

Also, Faulk had a personal trainer named Tomlinson, and Tomlinson has a personal trainer named Faulk.

This pithy comment isn't getting enough attention.

o'rly

Well, i didn't want to bloviate or anything...

 

[Tanner9919]

I think LT is one of the best backs of all time, but I can't say I'd be too thrilled to take him in the top 3 of a dynasty draft.

Agree. I'm not particularly convinced he should go #1 overall in a redraft. He probably should, but I'm still a little hesitant.

Yea, 1.01 in a redraft is not a slam dunk for me this year. I think you can justify 4-5 different guys there.

Especially in PPR. LT2, Westy, SJax, ADP, maybe Addai or Gore if you go out on a limb.

You're advocating taking Westy, of all people, ahead of LT?! If ever there was a poster boy for 'can't stay healthy' it is Brian Westbrook. Sjax I'll give you, he's a legit potential #1 overall pick, but only if the Rams' O-line holds up. ADP is another injury waiting to happen, and during the final 6 games of 2007, he averaged a lousy 50 yards/gm, 3.8 yards per clip. Is that a trend or what? Perhaps it is..Gore can't stay healthy, either. Martz is in town, and that is sure to kill Gore's rushing numbers...he'll get his catches though, but loses a lot of value in NON-PPR leagues..and there's the issue of the SF O-line, QB, etc..Addai isn't a stud like LT, but he's a relatively safe pick.Every one of these RB's you've listed have a 'yeah, but' , as in Westbrook is good..'yeah, but' he can't stay healthy, neither can his QB, etc..Lt's age is a concern, but with the best O-line in the NFL , and playing 6 games against some of the weakest rush defenses in the entire league ( KC ,Oak, Den), I'm just not sure now is the time to jump ship.I think you stay with LT one more season..