Time to put an end to the LJ carry myth (1 Viewer)

[Keith Lewis]

Since LJ has signed today, I spent some time digesting all of the pundits (and some on this board) that Larry's 416 carry '06 season is a predictor of his downfall. On the surface, it sounded scary. That is, until I looked a bit deeper.

Below are some backs throughout history and some statistics about their workload and subsequent productivity. Granted, there have been several backs to go over 400 carries in a season and fail to ever regain their form. Having said that, as the statistics show, there are an impressive amount of backs that go over 400 touches many times and are still very productive.

*Carries/touches include post-season*

Shaun Alexander - 430 carries in '05. I don't hear nearly as many people predicting his demise as LJ

Marcus Allen - 402 touches in '85. Played another 12 years and accumulated 7,600 more rushing yards.

Jim Brown - 351 touches in 14 games in '61. His first year in the league. Over a 16-game schedule, this would be over 400 carries.

Roger Craig - 455 touches (rush's and receptions) in '88

Terrell Davis - 481 carries in '97. Went over 2000k in '98.

Eric Dickerson - 413 carries in '83 (first year in league). 430 carries in '86, and played 7 more productive years.

Tony Dorsett - 416 touches (carries and receptions) in '81 - played 7 more productive years.

Edge James - 452 carries in first year in the league. 474 carries in second year in the league. 431 touches in '03.

Walter Payton - Went over 400 touches 4 times before the '85 season. Played many more productive seasons.

Clinton Portis - 402 Carries in '05

Barry Sanders - 405 carries in '91. Played 8 more productive years.

Emmitt Smith - 406 carries in '91. 444 carries in '92. 350 carries in '93. 395 carries in '94. 451 carries in '95. Played another 9-years after '95.

Thurman Thomas - 418 carries in '93. Played 7 more productive years.

And finally, the FBG golden boy

Ladanian Tomlinson - HAS AVERAGED 418 TOUCHES PER YEAR OVER FIRST SIX SEASONS IN THE NFL.

COMPARED TO...

Larry Johnson - AVERAGE 252 CARRIES OVER 4 YEARS.

This is not to say LJ won't break down. It is entirely possible. It is also entirely possible, as the above stat's illustrate, the LJ can continue to be very productive for a number of years. At the very least, the statistics illustrate the FBG bias toward LJ.

 

[AnonymousBob]

LJ isn't getting the loving he should.

 

[BroadwayG]

Terrell Davis - 481 carries in '97. Went over 2000k in '98.

I don't think LJ is going to approach 2 million yards this year.

 

[redman]

I think the point is getting missed. Guys who get over 400 carries overwhelmingly tend to have severe drop-offs in their next season, often due to injury. It's a huge wear on the body.

 

[Keith Lewis]

Terrell Davis - 481 carries in '97. Went over 2000k in '98.

I don't think LJ is going to approach 2 million yards this year.

Championship

 

[Club Leftwich]

First of all, you are mixing carries and touches when they aren't the same.

Secondly, you mention SA and Portis who were both hurt last year. I'm not sure how that supports your argument.

Finally, you add in playoff numbers to pad the field. I realize those carries come with wear and tear too, but it's still a lighter per game work load. Eric Dickerson is the only guy to ever have 400 regular season carries and still play at a high level the next year.

Maybe LJ will be the next guy to do it, but the combination of his physical style, the holdout and the fact that the Chiefs are going to suck mightily doesn't instill me with confidence.

 

[Keith Lewis]

Secondly, you mention SA and Portis who were both hurt last year. I'm not sure how that supports your argument.

Just putting the facts out there, not trying to have a strong argument, I have no interest in misleading anyone.

 

[tomarken]

Just throwing this out there, some stuff to check since you're already knee-deep in stats....

*Carries/touches include post-season*

Shaun Alexander - 430 carries in '05. I don't hear nearly as many people predicting his demise as LJ

What happened to him in '06?

Marcus Allen - 402 touches in '85. Played another 12 years and accumulated 7,600 more rushing yards.

What happened to him in '86?

Jim Brown - 351 touches in 14 games in '61. His first year in the league. Over a 16-game schedule, this would be over 400 carries.

First off, prorating carries is silly. Someone either did have 400 carries, or they didn't.

Oh also, what happened to him in '62?

Roger Craig - 455 touches (rush's and receptions) in '88

What happened to him in '89?

Terrell Davis - 481 carries in '97. Went over 2000k in '98.

Fair enough. But what happened to him in '99?

Eric Dickerson - 413 carries in '83 (first year in league). 430 carries in '86, and played 7 more productive years.

....'87?

Tony Dorsett - 416 touches (carries and receptions) in '81 - played 7 more productive years.

....'82?

Edge James - 452 carries in first year in the league. 474 carries in second year in the league. 431 touches in '03.

....'01?

Walter Payton - Went over 400 touches 4 times before the '85 season. Played many more productive seasons.

No he didn't.

Clinton Portis - 402 Carries in '05

....'06?

Barry Sanders - 405 carries in '91. Played 8 more productive years.

Production dropped in '92, plagued by injuries in '93.

Emmitt Smith - 406 carries in '91. 444 carries in '92. 350 carries in '93. 395 carries in '94. 451 carries in '95. Played another 9-years after '95.

I'll give you that one. But then again, he is the all-time NFL rushing leader...

Larry Johnson - AVERAGE 252 CARRIES OVER 4 YEARS.

You start to lose credibility when you include '03 and '04 in Larry Johnson's average.

 

[AB in DC]

Over a 16-game schedule, this would be over 400 carries.

Either this is an elaborate fishing trip, or someone is seriously missing the point.

 

[CalBear]

I think the point is getting missed. Guys who get over 400 carries overwhelmingly tend to have severe drop-offs in their next season, often due to injury. It's a huge wear on the body.

No, guys who get over 400 carries tend to have drop-offs the next season, due to regression to the mean. Guys who finish in the top 3 in fantasy points tend to have drop-offs the next season, as do guys who lead the league in rushing or guys who score 20 TDs. It's hard to do those things, and it's even harder to repeat them.But the fact that the population of [all RBs who had 400 carries] will tend to have fewer carries and less production in year N+1, does not mean that Larry Johnson or LT will have fewer carries and less production. You're looking at the results for a population and applying that to an individual, which you can't really do.

 

[Tenacious D]

The bottom line is, if you look at the top single-season carries (let's stick w/apples to apples), those close/at 400 carries, basically everyone but Eric D!ckerson was hurt or had a decline (most of them significant) in performance the next year. And for D!ckerson, it was just one of the amazing three times he appears on the top 10 list.

Jamal Anderson

1998 410-1846

1999 19-99 INJURED

Had one more 1K season (2000) before blowing other knee and ending career.

James Wilder

1984 407-1544

1985 365-1300

Never had 200 carries or 1K again after 1985.

Eddie George

2000 403-1509

2001 315-939 INJURED

Did have 343-1165 in 2002, but his production (ypc) has suffered and wasn't the same again.

Gerald Riggs

1985 397-1719

1986 343-1327

Never had another 1K or completely healthy season again after 1986.

Terrell Davis

1998 392-2008

1999 67-211 INJURED

I think everyone knows his deal after.

Ricky Williams

2003 392-1372

2004 Out of football

Played one more season, 2005, posting 168-743

Barry Foster

1992 390-1690

1993 177-711 INJURED

Put up 216-851 in 1994 and then was out of football at age 27.

Edgerrin James

2000 387-1709

2001 151-662 INJURED

Struggled with injuries for a few years before returning to form.

Jamal Lewis

2003 387-2066

2004 235-1006 INJURED

Sub-4.0 ypc rusher since.

Eric D!ckerson has 3 of the top 10 carries per season since 1970. However, when he did achieve it twice later in his career, he did experience a significant drop the next year:

1988 388-1659

1989 314-1311

1986 404-1821

1987 283-1288

1983 388-1808

1984 379-2105

Emmitt Smith was mentioned. He had a much more strenuous workload early in his career, but even then, his top season was 377 in 1995. Although he went on to obviously have continued success, even his production dropped dramatically after that year. From a 1,400+ yard ~4.5 ypc guy, to never getting over 350 touches again, never rushing for 1,400 yards again, and never posting higher than 4.2 ypc again.

 

[BigRed]

Did anyone else stop reading when they saw carries and touches being used interchangeably

Still, I agree that the whole 400+ thing is overblown.

Unfortunately, that's not LJ's only problem. The ENTIRE offense around him is iffy. No I'm not saying I wouldn't draft him or that means he'll have a bad year, but it is worth considering when debating between him and other top back - esp for those of us in auction drafts.

 

[smcindoe]

It's fine to list all the guys who got hurt, but it's not enough to put INJURED in all caps and rest your case. What kind of injury did they have? Was it a wear-and-tear injury, or one that could have happened to anyone?

For example, Anderson, Lewis, James and Davis all had serious knee injuries (I think they were all ACLs, but I could be wrong). Those injuries happen all the time, unfortunately. Is there any evidence, statistical or even common sense, that they're more likely to happen following a high-workload season? I'm not aware of it.

Now you could argue that the mere fact that at least four guys had that injury after a 400+ season is evidence that it increases the chances of a knee injury. That could be true. But it could also be true that the sample size of 400+ carry backs is just too small to draw any conclusions yet.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I think the point is getting missed. Guys who get over 400 carries overwhelmingly tend to have severe drop-offs in their next season, often due to injury. It's a huge wear on the body.

Not to mention his team is horrible

 

[CalBear]

Here's an example of the population fallacy.



#1 fantasy RB, 2000-2005

2000: Marshall Faulk (375 points). Declined to 341 points (-34) in 2001.

2001: Marshall Faulk (341 points). Declined to 209 points (-132) in 2002.

2002: Priest Holmes (373 points). Also scored 373 points in 2003.

2003: Priest Holmes (373 points). Declined to 198 points (-175) in 2004.

2004: Shaun Alexander (304 points). Increased to 364 points (+60) in 2005.

2005: Shaun Alexander (364 points). Declined to 136 points (-228) in 2006.

So since 2000, the #1 RB has only increased his output once, tied it once, and declined 4 times. The average has been a decline of 85 fantasy points. Before Alexander's increase in 2004, you had to go all the way back to Emmitt Smith in 1995 to find a #1 RB who increased his fantasy points in season N+1.

There's a reason these data look exactly like the 400-carry RB data; because they are exactly like the 400-carry RB data. Whenever you look at a population that is performing significantly above the mean (here, probably 2 standard deviations above the mean), that population will always regress towards the mean in year N+1.

Does that mean you should have avoided Priest Holmes in 2003, or Shaun Alexander in 2005?

 

[Tenacious D]

It's fine to list all the guys who got hurt, but it's not enough to put INJURED in all caps and rest your case.

Of course it is. I'm not making an arguement, I'm stating facts. Except for Dickerson (1 of 3 times), the top of the list of single-season rushers in history declined in performance the following year and many were hurt that season, as well. If you want to learn more about the injuries, try google.

 

[Willowdoc]

Secondly, you mention SA and Portis who were both hurt last year. I'm not sure how that supports your argument.

Just putting the facts out there, not trying to have a strong argument, I have no interest in misleading anyone.

Actually almost everyone you quoted was misleading. You prorated Jim brown to equal a 16 game season??? Buy a copy of Pro Football Prospectus 2007 from Football Outsiders. They do a statistical examination of this very topic and basically conclude that for Larry Johnson to not break down would be unusual. Only the aforementioned Eric Dickerson (who actually did it twice) has been effective the season after he had over 370 CARRIES (not touches, recieving touches are much less harmful). Could Larry Johnson do it? Sure, but I'll take my chances with Frank Gore or Joseph Addai or even Brian Westbrook before I would Larry Johnson.

 

[CalBear]

It's fine to list all the guys who got hurt, but it's not enough to put INJURED in all caps and rest your case.

Of course it is. I'm not making an arguement, I'm stating facts. Except for Dickerson (1 of 3 times), the top of the list of single-season rushers in history declined in performance the following year and many were hurt that season, as well. If you want to learn more about the injuries, try google.

The top of any list of single-season performers in history declines the following year. TDs, yards, carries, receptions. Look it up.

 

[Keith Lewis]

It's fine to list all the guys who got hurt, but it's not enough to put INJURED in all caps and rest your case.

Of course it is. I'm not making an arguement, I'm stating facts. Except for Dickerson (1 of 3 times), the top of the list of single-season rushers in history declined in performance the following year and many were hurt that season, as well. If you want to learn more about the injuries, try google.

Go ahead and post Edgerrin James complete history, including playoffs. Several times he eclipsed 400 carries and balled hard the next year. You can do the same with Terrell Davis and get the same results.

 

[Tenacious D]

Here's an example of the population fallacy.blah, blah, blah

It's also an example of something that has nothing to do with anything that is being discussed here.

 

[Keith Lewis]

Secondly, you mention SA and Portis who were both hurt last year. I'm not sure how that supports your argument.

Just putting the facts out there, not trying to have a strong argument, I have no interest in misleading anyone.

Actually almost everyone you quoted was misleading. You prorated Jim brown to equal a 16 game season??? Buy a copy of Pro Football Prospectus 2007 from Football Outsiders. They do a statistical examination of this very topic and basically conclude that for Larry Johnson to not break down would be unusual. Only the aforementioned Eric Dickerson (who actually did it twice) has been effective the season after he had over 370 CARRIES (not touches, recieving touches are much less harmful). Could Larry Johnson do it? Sure, but I'll take my chances with Frank Gore or Joseph Addai or even Brian Westbrook before I would Larry Johnson.

If you include playoffs, you'll see you're way off base with the 370 carries, Check Edge/TD and even tenacious posted James Wilder, then you can look at my original list and find many more. I am including playoffs, a carry is a carry.

 

[CalBear]

Here's an example of the population fallacy.blah, blah, blah

It's also an example of something that has nothing to do with anything that is being discussed here.

Of course it has to do with what is being discussed here. Do you avoid LT because of the "#1 RB Curse"?

 

[Keith Lewis]

Here's a funny little tidbit:

Priest Holmes broke the TD record and got hurt the next year.

Shaun Alexander broke the TD record and got hurt the next year.

Are we to conclude LT gets hurt? This is off topic but it's interesting that the golden boy always escapes critics.

 

[smcindoe]

First off, prorating carries is silly. Someone either did have 400 carries, or they didn't.

This is undoubtedly true, but in that case why don't we count post-season touches? Why only regular season?

 

[smcindoe]

Of course it is. I'm not making an arguement, I'm stating facts. Except for Dickerson (1 of 3 times), the top of the list of single-season rushers in history declined in performance the following year and many were hurt that season, as well. If you want to learn more about the injuries, try google.

So you really believe the type of injury doesn't matter? If LJ gets run over by a bus tomorrow, does that prove the argument?

 

[jurb26]

Here's a funny little tidbitriest Holmes broke the TD record and got hurt the next year.Shaun Alexander broke the TD record and got hurt the next year.Are we to conclude LT gets hurt? This is off topic but it's interesting that the golden boy always escapes critics.

I wouldn't say that he escapes critics, only that so many people are in love with him the critics are few and far between. There have been plenty of people around here to talk about the possibility of a LT breakdown.

 

[Gopher State]

I be more worried about the shape of the O-Line in KC and the QB play or lack. These two issues will have more to say with how LJ does this year then the past amount of carries he has had.

 

[gregjcross]

I think the point is getting missed. Guys who get over 400 carries overwhelmingly tend to have severe drop-offs in their next season, often due to injury. It's a huge wear on the body.

No, guys who get over 400 carries tend to have drop-offs the next season, due to regression to the mean. Guys who finish in the top 3 in fantasy points tend to have drop-offs the next season, as do guys who lead the league in rushing or guys who score 20 TDs. It's hard to do those things, and it's even harder to repeat them. .

 

[jhgoldst]

It's fine to list all the guys who got hurt, but it's not enough to put INJURED in all caps and rest your case.

Of course it is. I'm not making an arguement, I'm stating facts. Except for Dickerson (1 of 3 times), the top of the list of single-season rushers in history declined in performance the following year and many were hurt that season, as well. If you want to learn more about the injuries, try google.

The top of any list of single-season performers in history declines the following year. TDs, yards, carries, receptions. Look it up.

It would help to know if Football Outsiders compared the 370+ carry regression to the drop-offs of all top performers. My guess is that CalBear is on target here, that the 370+ carry phenomenon is more the result of the regression-to-the-mean phenomenon than 'wear and tear'.

 

[Willowdoc]

Secondly, you mention SA and Portis who were both hurt last year. I'm not sure how that supports your argument.

Just putting the facts out there, not trying to have a strong argument, I have no interest in misleading anyone.

Actually almost everyone you quoted was misleading. You prorated Jim brown to equal a 16 game season??? Buy a copy of Pro Football Prospectus 2007 from Football Outsiders. They do a statistical examination of this very topic and basically conclude that for Larry Johnson to not break down would be unusual. Only the aforementioned Eric Dickerson (who actually did it twice) has been effective the season after he had over 370 CARRIES (not touches, recieving touches are much less harmful). Could Larry Johnson do it? Sure, but I'll take my chances with Frank Gore or Joseph Addai or even Brian Westbrook before I would Larry Johnson.

If you include playoffs, you'll see you're way off base with the 370 carries, Check Edge/TD and even tenacious posted James Wilder, then you can look at my original list and find many more. I am including playoffs, a carry is a carry.

Actually they included playoff in their study. When I get home, I will be able to look at the article and give you more definitive reply.

 

[SilentReader]

I think the point is getting missed. Guys who get over 400 carries overwhelmingly tend to have severe drop-offs in their next season, often due to injury. It's a huge wear on the body.

Not to mention his team is horrible

The Chiefs made the playoffs last year, and in the AFC which we all know was much better than the NFC last year. And what exactly is different about the team this year that will make them significantly worse? And don't tell me that losing Trent Green will make much of a difference, because he barely played last year, and when he did, he wasn't very effective at all. They basically have the same team as last year, which was a good team.

 

[CalBear]

Actually they included playoff in their study. When I get home, I will be able to look at the article and give you more definitive reply.

The Football Outsiders 370-carry study is a perfect example of how not to do statistical analysis. They discard data that don't fit their hypothesis (such as receptions, or carries in playoff games, or Eric Dickerson) until their sample sizes are too small to be meaningful, and then they curve-fit the remaining data to come up with an arbitrary number (370, in this case) which emphasizes the case they want to make. Then they gloss over the fact that, even after that cherry-picking and curve-fitting, the correlations are virtually non-existent, and they don't even mention the issue of correlation not equating to causation. It's complete junk.

 

[tomarken]

First off, prorating carries is silly. Someone either did have 400 carries, or they didn't.

This is undoubtedly true, but in that case why don't we count post-season touches? Why only regular season?

The OP did count post-season touches...

 

[videoguy505]

First off, prorating carries is silly. Someone either did have 400 carries, or they didn't.

This is undoubtedly true, but in that case why don't we count post-season touches? Why only regular season?

The OP did count post-season touches...

Well, then he was wrong. Post season carries still end in being tackled, so, they should count as wear and tear.

 

[tomarken]

First off, prorating carries is silly. Someone either did have 400 carries, or they didn't.

This is undoubtedly true, but in that case why don't we count post-season touches? Why only regular season?

The OP did count post-season touches...

Well, then he was wrong. Post season carries still end in being tackled, so, they should count as wear and tear.

Either you guys are really lost, or I am, because I have no idea what's going on here. Whatever, this topic was getting boring fast anyway.

 

[Keith Lewis]

First off, prorating carries is silly. Someone either did have 400 carries, or they didn't.

This is undoubtedly true, but in that case why don't we count post-season touches? Why only regular season?

The OP did count post-season touches...

Well, then he was wrong. Post season carries still end in being tackled, so, they should count as wear and tear.

Either you guys are really lost, or I am, because I have no idea what's going on here. Whatever, this topic was getting boring fast anyway.

The LJ will get hurt because of 400 carries has been "DeBunked".

 

[AB in DC]

Actually they included playoff in their study. When I get home, I will be able to look at the article and give you more definitive reply.

The Football Outsiders 370-carry study is a perfect example of how not to do statistical analysis. They discard data that don't fit their hypothesis (such as receptions, or carries in playoff games, or Eric Dickerson)

There is a follow-up study that addresses both of these. It didn't change the conclusion.

 

[Keith Lewis]

When you include playoff carries the whole theory gets blown to crud and flushed down the toilet. Cal Bear made some really good points earlier which I agree with fully.

 

[Colin Dowling]

Love LJ this season, no worse then 3rd overall.

That said, in my 20 team 8-keeper league, I traded him and the #20 overall (I won last year) for the #1 (Peterson) and Jerry Porter. LJ should continue to be good, and should be great this year, but his long-term prospects are shoddy at best.

 

[CalBear]

Actually they included playoff in their study. When I get home, I will be able to look at the article and give you more definitive reply.

The Football Outsiders 370-carry study is a perfect example of how not to do statistical analysis. They discard data that don't fit their hypothesis (such as receptions, or carries in playoff games, or Eric Dickerson)

There is a follow-up study that addresses both of these. It didn't change the conclusion.

I'm looking at this study, dated 1/1/2007. They discard receptions because adding receptions doesn't fit their desired conclusion. They're also disingenuous or dishonest when they talk about reception data; look at this data set from the Historical Data Dominator (RBs with 85 or more receptions); I'm pretty sure there's a strong negative correlation between winding up on that list in year N, and production in year N+1. Why? Because RBs don't get that many receptions very often. It is not surprising that the populations of RBs who are in the middle of the pack in receptions doesn't decline in year N+1; a mean population doesn't have to regress to the mean.They make sweeping statements like "The 370-carry barrier helped destroy the careers of Earl Campbell, Barry Foster, and Gerald Riggs" that are not at all supported by the data.

Of the 14 anecdotes for players who crossed the 370-carry "threshhold" in the playoffs, in six of those cases, the player was still similarly productive in year N+1.

 

[Colin Dowling]

Of the 14 anecdotes for players who crossed the 370-carry "threshhold" in the playoffs, in six of those cases, the player was still similarly productive in year N+1.

So, in less ten 50% of the cases, the player was "similarly productive?" LJ's ADP is 1.03, which is where he finished last year in many leagues. So, you are willing to take a less then 1 in 2 chance (< 50%) that LJ will be "similarly" productive to the place he ended up last year via the corresponding ADP this year?Interesting.

 

[Willowdoc]

I think the point is getting missed. Guys who get over 400 carries overwhelmingly tend to have severe drop-offs in their next season, often due to injury. It's a huge wear on the body.

Not to mention his team is horrible

The Chiefs made the playoffs last year, and in the AFC which we all know was much better than the NFC last year. And what exactly is different about the team this year that will make them significantly worse? And don't tell me that losing Trent Green will make much of a difference, because he barely played last year, and when he did, he wasn't very effective at all. They basically have the same team as last year, which was a good team.

Hmmmm. Losing your all-world guard, Will Shields, doesn't hurt the offense at all. Then the guy they replaced their all-world tackle Willie Roaf left town to go to Houston. Then the also-ran they were going to have at left tackle, Damion MCintosh is out for quite a while. Casey Wegmann is still great, but they have one of the worst offensive lines in football significantly worse than last year. Tony Gonzales is going to have to block on many more plays then he did in the past. And no matter how poorly Trent Green played, opponents at least respected him, which they won't Brodie Croyle. Larry Johnson is a top 5 pick, but only due to the number of carries he will get, if he doesn't get injured first, but he is going to have to do a Barry Sanders impersonation of playing without an offensive line to be close and the offense will be so pathetic that his touchdown chances will be reduced dramatically. I truly believe the Kansas City Chiefs will be the worst team in the AFC this year and a member of the Brohm Closet (along with Atlanta).

 

[One]

Here's a funny little tidbit:

Priest Holmes broke the TD record and got hurt the next year.

Shaun Alexander broke the TD record and got hurt the next year.

Are we to conclude LT gets hurt? This is off topic but it's interesting that the golden boy always escapes critics.

This has been the case for a while. Johnson is rated in the right place at #3-4 IMO though.

 

[nygiants56]

I think the point is getting missed. Guys who get over 400 carries overwhelmingly tend to have severe drop-offs in their next season, often due to injury. It's a huge wear on the body.

but, of those guys with 400+ carries, how many have been established NFL RB's with plenty of wear and tear on their legs?!you're not talking about Barry Sanders getting 400 carries in his rookie year, and 230 the next season, you're talking about a guy like Emmitt Smith, in,say, his 7th season,getting 400 carries and never being the same after since he had 2400 carries to his name, up to that point in his NFL career....

or someone like C-Mart, at the age of 29 ,after already logging 2895 career carries ( for instance) , getting 420 one season and fading into the sunset the following the next..

MOST if not ALL of the guys you can cite in any example, would be guys like C-mart who had/have significant wear and tear on their bodies already, LONG before taking on a 420 carry season..you are not talking about a young, 3rd year guy like Clinton Portis , who rushed for 343 carries in 2004, and came back in 2005, his 4th season,and rushed for 352 carries, and 1/2 yard more per carry avg than the previous season...( just using this as an example)

I'm not remotely convinced a guy like LJ has more to worry about ,what with his 892 career carries over 4 seasons, than LT does, with his 2050 lifetime carries and 398 receptions in 6 NFL seasons...there is NO comparison..if LT had 419 carries last season, I'd be scared to death that he'd get hurt or see a significant drop-off in stats this season.

But LJ has relatively LOW miles for a veteran RB who's been in the league for 4 years now.

you're comparing apples and oranges..I know all about Jamal Anderson, but his case is thrown out because the Falcons were playing on carpet back then, and he cut on it,blowing out a knee while running untouched by a defender..i doubt 1 season of 400+ carries was the catalyst there, as much as taking an awkward step,planting a foot in a carpet laid over cement, and trying to cut on a dime with a large body such as his was..that was a freak injury...

I'd be worried about Brandon Jacobs flopping more than LJ getting hurt or seeing a drop in stats..only 2 RB's in NFL history,at or over 260 lbs, ever rushed for more than 1,000 yards in a season..neither lasted long..that to me, is a much bigger role of the dice than selecting a relively unused LJ in his 5th season, 419 carries be damned..

 

[bjabrad]

Wow, I'm pretty freaked out about LJ's 400+ carries last year so I'm not going to draft him. Come to think of it,,,most NFL RB's have a decline within their first four years in the league so I'm really freaked out now and because of this I think it's just too risky to draft ANY RB's at my draft on Saturday. They just get injured way too much!!!

Seriously though, the sample size is too small to be predictive of anything other than most RB's get hurt at some point in their short, short careers.

Now when can we debunk the politially correct groupthink that steroids are always bad for your body?

 

[Keith Lewis]

I know all about Jamal Anderson, but his case is thrown out because the Falcons were playing on carpet back then, and he cut on it,blowing out a knee while running untouched by a defender..i doubt 1 season of 400+ carries was the catalyst there, as much as taking an awkward step,planting a foot in a carpet laid over cement, and trying to cut on a dime with a large body such as his was..that was a freak injury...

Maybe the curse of 400 made his foot bend that way?

 

[EBF]

Draft at your own risk. I'm terrified of his huge workload over the past two seasons and by the horrendous supporting cast he'll be working with. I definitely think he's done as an elite FF back.

The comparisons to Tomlinson hold little weight, IMO. They have two totally different running styles. Tomlinson is stockier and is extremely skilled at avoiding big hits. If any modern RB has a chance to be teflon like Emmitt and Martin, it's LT.

 

[AnonymousBob]

Of the 14 anecdotes for players who crossed the 370-carry "threshhold" in the playoffs, in six of those cases, the player was still similarly productive in year N+1.

So, in less ten 50% of the cases, the player was "similarly productive?" LJ's ADP is 1.03, which is where he finished last year in many leagues. So, you are willing to take a less then 1 in 2 chance (< 50%) that LJ will be "similarly" productive to the place he ended up last year via the corresponding ADP this year?Interesting.

Half the rb's drop out of the top ten from one season to the next. Are you willing to take that 50% gamble?

 

[AnonymousBob]

I think the point is getting missed. Guys who get over 400 carries overwhelmingly tend to have severe drop-offs in their next season, often due to injury. It's a huge wear on the body.

Not to mention his team is horrible

The Chiefs made the playoffs last year, and in the AFC which we all know was much better than the NFC last year. And what exactly is different about the team this year that will make them significantly worse? And don't tell me that losing Trent Green will make much of a difference, because he barely played last year, and when he did, he wasn't very effective at all. They basically have the same team as last year, which was a good team.

Hmmmm. Losing your all-world guard, Will Shields, doesn't hurt the offense at all. Then the guy they replaced their all-world tackle Willie Roaf left town to go to Houston. Then the also-ran they were going to have at left tackle, Damion MCintosh is out for quite a while. Casey Wegmann is still great, but they have one of the worst offensive lines in football significantly worse than last year. Tony Gonzales is going to have to block on many more plays then he did in the past. And no matter how poorly Trent Green played, opponents at least respected him, which they won't Brodie Croyle. Larry Johnson is a top 5 pick, but only due to the number of carries he will get, if he doesn't get injured first, but he is going to have to do a Barry Sanders impersonation of playing without an offensive line to be close and the offense will be so pathetic that his touchdown chances will be reduced dramatically. I truly believe the Kansas City Chiefs will be the worst team in the AFC this year and a member of the Brohm Closet (along with Atlanta).

If teams respected Green more then why did LJ put up better numbers when Green was OUT of the lineup?

 

[CalBear]

Of the 14 anecdotes for players who crossed the 370-carry "threshhold" in the playoffs, in six of those cases, the player was still similarly productive in year N+1.

So, in less ten 50% of the cases, the player was "similarly productive?" LJ's ADP is 1.03, which is where he finished last year in many leagues. So, you are willing to take a less then 1 in 2 chance (< 50%) that LJ will be "similarly" productive to the place he ended up last year via the corresponding ADP this year?Interesting.

In 66% of the cases since 2000, the RB who finished as #1 overall had a significant decline in production in year N+1. So are you willing to take the 1 in 3 chance (33%) that LT will be "similarly" productive to the place he ended up last year via the corresponding ADP this year?400 carries is no better a predictor of a decline than a #1 fantasy ranking, or leading the league in yardage. If you're going to avoid someone because he had 400 carries with no injuries, you should also avoid someone because he finished #1, or led the league in yardage or TDs.