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

[kurtrudder]

Even if Larry Johnson does happen to get injured in 2007, I think it will be more to do with being the only offensive weapon for KC, he will be overused by Herm in 2007 and this will increase his risk of injury anyway , not because of some magical 370/400 carry mark. LJ doesn't come with risk this season but it's not because he carried the ball 430 times last season, other factors in KC (o-line/QB situ/team harmony with the way LJ was treated by the front office) that make me question whether to draft him at 1.03. If he starts slipping in your draft to 1.07, will you draft him then or just stick to your theory that people who carried the ball 370+ times will fail the following season.

I totally buy into the regression to the mean theory.

 

[SteelerMurf]

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.

This is just some mythical number that everyone grabbed out of their butt. The wear on the body? If you are guaranteed to get hurt after 400 carries, why didn't they just get hurt that year? The NFL by it's nature is wear on the body.you know what is wear on the body? 2 a day camps and preseason football......LJ has had a nice rest compared to the rest of the RBs in the NFLand sorry, you have to look at carries getting a direct handoff or a swing pass out of the backfield. The end result is a carry of the ball and getting tackled. Why are we not concerned that LT and Sjax had on average maybe 1 or 2 less touches a game than LJ? Did that extra touch of the ball cause tiny little pockets of injury in LJ just ready to explode. Stupid Herm, if he just wouldn't have given him the ball that extra 2 times a game LJ would be clean sailing thru another STUD year of football.It's funny we are talking about LJ getting hurt and are not alarmed at all about the real injury risk Frank Gore already being hurt NOW. I guess a RB with a broken hand and 2 rebuilt knees, and 2 rebuilt shoulders is just built to be a workhorse.

 

[smcindoe]

This is just some mythical number that everyone grabbed out of their butt. The wear on the body? If you are guaranteed to get hurt after 400 carries, why didn't they just get hurt that year?

This is an excellent point.The argument always seems to be "if you have 400+ carries, you will get hurt early in the next year". Why don't you get hurt they year you have all the carries? Surely if there's something to this wear-and-tear argument, you should be more injury prone in the final games of a 360-carry season thanyou would be after a full off-season of rest and rehab following a 400-carry season? What is it about the off-season that somehow magnifies the wear-and-tear from the previous season.

 

[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?

The OP did count post-season touches...

He did. Most of the people who talk about how many carries a guy had as a predictor of injury do not.

 

[Chase Stuart]

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.

If they were the single-season rushing leaders, that implies hat they declined in performance the next year. Otherwise, you know, they wouldn't have been the single-season leaders.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Here's the part I don't get -- the theory just doesn't make any sense. Can someone explain full why a guy with 400 carries is more likely to get hut next season than a guy with 320 carries? What type of injury is he more likely to suffer? How much more likely is he to get hurt? And why in the world would he rush 399 times and not get hurt on his 400th carry in 4 months, but after six months of rest, he's going to get hurt? It seems really odd to me.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Here's the part I don't get -- the theory just doesn't make any sense. Can someone explain full why a guy with 400 carries is more likely to get hut next season than a guy with 320 carries? What type of injury is he more likely to suffer? How much more likely is he to get hurt? And why in the world would he rush 399 times and not get hurt on his 400th carry in 4 months, but after six months of rest, he's going to get hurt? It seems really odd to me.

Each persons body reacts different to stress.....some handle it better than others. Its not really something that is predictable. I wouldn't be excited that he had 400+ carries last year going into this year, but predicting injuries is not a good thing to do. I think what people are missing w/ the LJ argument is that 1) he wont see 400+ carries this year and 2) His team is horrible. These are reasons I feel he won't finish in the top 3, however Top 10 is not out of the question.

 

[TD Ryan]

there's just so much over analysis here!

the "mythical" 400 carries

- not all 400 carry seasons are the same, not every RB was the same age, had the same career workload, suffered the exact same hits/punishment.

the rush =1, catch =.5 on the punishment scale

- this is the one I really love. It's taken as fact now, as gospel now that catching the ball is only half a punishing as running the ball... WTF? Says Who? Stupidest things I've ever heard... I'd much rather tuck a ball under my arm and try to be the hitter instead of the hittee... when you catch the ball, your concentration is on holding on to the ball, not delivering a blow to a defender.

Look, if you want to worry about LJs supporting cast and o-line? I've got no problem with that, there's legit concerns there.

But this idea that, basically, "LJ get's the ball too much, so I don't want him" is absurd.

Paralysis by over analysis.

I have the #3 pick, and I'm taking LJ with full confidence. Sure, maybe his numbers won't be exactly what they've been in the past, but I don't see him being a complete bust. He's no more likely to get injured than LT, he just doesn't play in as friendly and offense.

 

[smcindoe]

Here's the part I don't get -- the theory just doesn't make any sense. Can someone explain full why a guy with 400 carries is more likely to get hut next season than a guy with 320 carries? What type of injury is he more likely to suffer? How much more likely is he to get hurt? And why in the world would he rush 399 times and not get hurt on his 400th carry in 4 months, but after six months of rest, he's going to get hurt? It seems really odd to me.

Exactly.Now that said, I think we all agree that playing RB in the NFL is a physically punishing job with high risk of injury. And I think we'd further agree that in general, the more carries you get the more likely you are to get hurt because each and every time you get the ball there's a chance something could go wrong. So yes, a guy who carries it 400 times in a season is probably more likely to get hurt by the end of the year than the guy who carries it 200 times. But the question is what influence the past has on the future.

For sake of argument, let's say that an average NFL back will suffer a catastrophic injury once every 2000 carries. No idea if that's close to accurate but doesn't really matter. So each time they take a hand off, there's a 0.05% chance of a serious injury. That's about the same odds as me flipping a coin having it come up the same result 12 times in a row. Clearly, the longer I flip the coin the more likely it becomes that I'll eventually get a streak of 12. But that doesn't mean it gets more or less likely as I go -- if I flip 5,000 times in a row without getting a streak, it's no more likely to happen soon.

On the other hand, say I have a jar full of 2,000 marbles and one of them is the "injury" marble. As I pull out each marble without getting the bad one, the likelihood of it coming up next pull get better and better. It's going to happen eventually, and the longer I stay lucky the more likely it gets that my luck runs out.

So ... is an RB's injury odds like flipping a coin? Or is it like pulling marbles out of a jar? That's the key question, and I suspect the answer is different for different types of injuries. But nobody seems interested in figuring it out, since it's more fun to lump everything together and draw conclusion based on a sample size of less than 20.

 

[OCC]

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.

Great post.Fantasy football is very loose with "research" and "evidence" and "data". Factor in sports nutrition, eras, small sample sizes, it's all mostly bathroom reading. The fact is, NO ONE has data on how many times a running back was HIT. If you run up the middle, get blasted by the safety, that's the same as running out of bounds without being touched. And that's the data we're using to predicting the future with? Seriously. If you put in garbage, you get out garbage. For all we know, SJAX might have been hit more then LJ last year. He could have been hit much more. 30, 50, 75? We have no clue. But we're sure enough in the quality of the data to predict the future? Some of these FF researchers should work on Wall Street. They'd make way more money predicting the future there.

 

[Raiders Fan]

There are way too many assumptions out there.. Some experts get concerned with workload and publically say something and it catches on.. This has nothing to do with facts. Wil he drop off?? Sure they already said they will not let him get the same carries. Normally you would expect his Fantasy Points to drop.. What if he produced more per run then last year?? Wouldn't it be a wash then?? Is that possible?? This is what I think is going to happen this year. So you all let him drop because your banking on an injury or a drop off from production. I'll bank on facts in front and not try to predict the worst..

 

[Dexter Manley]

As other posters have pointed out, touches doesn't equal hits taken, the quality of the hits taken, etc. This simply isn't an accurate and appropriate data measurement.

And for arguments sake, let's say it was. Even if that was the case, the sample size is so small it's laughable. Basically we just have a bunch of case studies of different players to analyze on how they perform the year after a season where they've had a heavy workload. You can't get any meaningful statistical results out of a sample size this small.

Someone above mentioned that LT2 doesn't have the same wear and tear/injury risk as LJ because his running style is conducive to avoiding hits, while LJ's isn't. Well then, how do you explain Eric Dickerson's consistent production and success at avoiding injury for so long, despite an insane amount of touches every year? ED had a very upright running style, the same type of upright running style that the majority of people around here have lamented was the cause for an early end to Eddie George's career.

Every player's body and conditioning is different. Some guys are simply physical freaks when it comes to there health and durability. For a non-football related example, I just watched a couple episodes of "The Drug Years" on VH1 last weekend. In one of them, it was pointed out that in the early '70's, Keith Richards was voted #1 on the list of rock stars most likely to die soon because of his drug abuse. Well last time I checked, it's over 30 years later and the dude is still kicking.

The bottom line is there is a certain amount of risk with every player, and I think you have to analyze every player on a case by case basis as best you can. LJ only started one full season in college. Last year was the first time he was a full time starter for the entire season in his nfl career. He doesn't have much mileage on him for a 28 yo rb. He has avoided the wear and tear of training camp this year, and is reportedly in excellent shape from working at that world class clinic in AZ, twice a day. He's never had a significant injury.

Quite frankly, I think the people who think LJ is more of (or as great of) an injury risk than Gore, Westbrook, Addai, and a few other top rb's are taking crazy pills. If people are projecting lower #'s for LJ due to the loss of Shields, and the breaking in of a young qb, I'll buy that.

 

[ImTheScientist]

As other posters have pointed out, touches doesn't equal hits taken, the quality of the hits taken, etc. This simply isn't an accurate and appropriate data measurement.

And for arguments sake, let's say it was. Even if that was the case, the sample size is so small it's laughable. Basically we just have a bunch of case studies of different players to analyze on how they perform the year after a season where they've had a heavy workload. You can't get any meaningful statistical results out of a sample size this small.

Someone above mentioned that LT2 doesn't have the same wear and tear/injury risk as LJ because his running style is conducive to avoiding hits, while LJ's isn't. Well then, how do you explain Eric Dickerson's consistent production and success at avoiding injury for so long, despite an insane amount of touches every year? ED had a very upright running style, the same type of upright running style that the majority of people around here have lamented was the cause for an early end to Eddie George's career.

Every player's body and conditioning is different. Some guys are simply physical freaks when it comes to there health and durability. For a non-football related example, I just watched a couple episodes of "The Drug Years" on VH1 last weekend. In one of them, it was pointed out that in the early '70's, Keith Richards was voted #1 on the list of rock stars most likely to die soon because of his drug abuse. Well last time I checked, it's over 30 years later and the dude is still kicking.

The bottom line is there is a certain amount of risk with every player, and I think you have to analyze every player on a case by case basis as best you can. LJ only started one full season in college. Last year was the first time he was a full time starter for the entire season in his nfl career. He doesn't have much mileage on him for a 28 yo rb. He has avoided the wear and tear of training camp this year, and is reportedly in excellent shape from working at that world class clinic in AZ, twice a day. He's never had a significant injury.

Quite frankly, I think the people who think LJ is more of (or as great of) an injury risk than Gore, Westbrook, Addai, and a few other top rb's are taking crazy pills. If people are projecting lower #'s for LJ due to the loss of Shields, and the breaking in of a young qb, I'll buy that.

 

[Keith Lewis]

What is quite humorous is that now that the LJ contract issue has been resolved, the 400 carry myth proved false, now we have to contend with "He's not angry". What a joke.

If you believe the Oline is worse or the QB play will suffer and LJ will suffer because of that, great, I would agree if the line doesn't open up the holes the production will go down, I also agree if the QB play suffers it will hurt LJ. I don't think the line will be worse, but that's just one mans opinion, I actually think it may be better this year than last year. I do think if Croyle starts that is a negative.

As someone mentioned if you think LJ is more likely to get hurt than addai, westbrook or gore because of a high load last season then you need some crazy pills.

In all the other threads, everyone is talking about how LJ isn't angry anymore, to that I say, make up whatever horsepoop you need to in order to make yourself feel better that the LJ owner isn't going to pound on you in the playoffs with LJs CAKE SCHEDULE during the fantasy playoffs.

 

[bocksheesh]

What is quite humorous is that now that the LJ contract issue has been resolved, the 400 carry myth proved false, now we have to contend with "He's not angry". What a joke.If you believe the Oline is worse or the QB play will suffer and LJ will suffer because of that, great, I would agree if the line doesn't open up the holes the production will go down, I also agree if the QB play suffers it will hurt LJ. I don't think the line will be worse, but that's just one mans opinion, I actually think it may be better this year than last year. I do think if Croyle starts that is a negative. As someone mentioned if you think LJ is more likely to get hurt than addai, westbrook or gore because of a high load last season then you need some crazy pills. In all the other threads, everyone is talking about how LJ isn't angry anymore, to that I say, make up whatever horsepoop you need to in order to make yourself feel better that the LJ owner isn't going to pound on you in the playoffs with LJs CAKE SCHEDULE during the fantasy playoffs.

Don't disagree with you that the concerns over LJ's workload last season are overstated. Not so sure about the OLine situation - the single thing that worries me the most - but I'm relying on KC homers and insiders for that final opinion.But to your point about schedule, I think it is one that a lot of people are missing. And yes, LJ has a CAKE schedule come playoff time.HOWEVER, take a look at LJ's schedule in the first 5 games: Houston, Chicago, Minnesota, San Diego, Jacksonville. Yikes!The Chiefs are, in all likelihood, going to be starting an experienced QB in Croyle, still have an OLine that is gelling, and an offense that started slow last season.So yes, LJ may have a cake schedule in the playoffs, but with that opening schedule and a slow start, you might be done before you even start with LJ - he could have some mediocre games for sure in the first, pivotal month of the season.THAT concerns me.

 

[ImTheScientist]

You do know carries and touches are different.....don't you.

 

[Keith Lewis]

What is quite humorous is that now that the LJ contract issue has been resolved, the 400 carry myth proved false, now we have to contend with "He's not angry". What a joke.

If you believe the Oline is worse or the QB play will suffer and LJ will suffer because of that, great, I would agree if the line doesn't open up the holes the production will go down, I also agree if the QB play suffers it will hurt LJ. I don't think the line will be worse, but that's just one mans opinion, I actually think it may be better this year than last year. I do think if Croyle starts that is a negative.

As someone mentioned if you think LJ is more likely to get hurt than addai, westbrook or gore because of a high load last season then you need some crazy pills.

In all the other threads, everyone is talking about how LJ isn't angry anymore, to that I say, make up whatever horsepoop you need to in order to make yourself feel better that the LJ owner isn't going to pound on you in the playoffs with LJs CAKE SCHEDULE during the fantasy playoffs.

Don't disagree with you that the concerns over LJ's workload last season are overstated. Not so sure about the OLine situation - the single thing that worries me the most - but I'm relying on KC homers and insiders for that final opinion.But to your point about schedule, I think it is one that a lot of people are missing. And yes, LJ has a CAKE schedule come playoff time.

HOWEVER, take a look at LJ's schedule in the first 5 games: Houston, Chicago, Minnesota, San Diego, Jacksonville. Yikes!

The Chiefs are, in all likelihood, going to be starting an experienced QB in Croyle, still have an OLine that is gelling, and an offense that started slow last season.

So yes, LJ may have a cake schedule in the playoffs, but with that opening schedule and a slow start, you might be done before you even start with LJ - he could have some mediocre games for sure in the first, pivotal month of the season.

THAT concerns me.

I agree about the first 5 games, I noticed that right away myself. I would rather have him play the Jets/Eagles/Lions than Minn,SD,Chicago,Jax obviously. But with that in mind, here's what he did last year against some good/great run Ds (including receiving):San Diego Game 1: 160 and 2 TD

San Diego Game 2: 93 and 0 TD

Denver Game 1: 160 and 0 TD

Denver Game 2: 160 and 1 TD

Oakland Game 1: 154 and 2 TD

Oakland Game 2: 135 and 1 TD

Baltimore 125 and 0 TD

Jacksonville 150 and 3 TD

Gamelogs

 

[mdog1967]

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..

Great F***** post, I agree with you 100%. Stats are great when they take all data into account, they mean what they mean. LJ has how much wear and tear? I would like to point out to folks that it was just a couple of years ago that Curtis Martin ran for 371 carries and 1697 yards leading the league in Rushing that year. Curtis Martin had already been running for ten years at that point, TEN. So every rule is a rule untill its not. So I understand the idea that excess carries can be cause for concern. More likely Johnson will be a top five back without the extended carries he received last year. I hate Herm Edwards as a coach, a great man but a terrible coach. He has had some success though with stiching together some pretty decent offensive lines with some rag tag players. So I dont see Johnson having much trouble running this year.

 

[turnit643]

I thought this might be relevant to this thread rather than starting a new one ... LJ says to expect a slow start.

From Sportingnews.com

Ecerpt:

"A 25-day holdout helped make Larry Johnson the most highly paid player in Kansas City Chiefs history. The downside is the Pro Bowl running back doesn't think he'll be ready for a full role in the season opener. Asked Wednesday if he thought he'd be 100 percent ready by Sept. 9 when the Chiefs open at Houston, Johnson said, "No, it'll take a little bit more than that." "Obviously, coaches are going to do a great job trying to get me on track to where week two or week three of the season I can hit my full stride," he said. "I'm going to try pick up as fast as I can.""

ETA:

"Many think that taking off during camp and the first three exhibition games could prove beneficial after Johnson carried an NFL-record 416 times last year. "What I know about myself is I've never been a fast starter coming out of the blocks in a season," he said. "I've always been -- the last eight games is when I really turn it on. So I'm going to push myself as hard as I can to try to even it out.""

 

[One]

I thought this might be relevant to this thread rather than starting a new one ... LJ says to expect a slow start.

From Sportingnews.com

Ecerpt:

"A 25-day holdout helped make Larry Johnson the most highly paid player in Kansas City Chiefs history. The downside is the Pro Bowl running back doesn't think he'll be ready for a full role in the season opener. Asked Wednesday if he thought he'd be 100 percent ready by Sept. 9 when the Chiefs open at Houston, Johnson said, "No, it'll take a little bit more than that." "Obviously, coaches are going to do a great job trying to get me on track to where week two or week three of the season I can hit my full stride," he said. "I'm going to try pick up as fast as I can.""

His playoff schedule might be worth a gander. That's where it counts.

 

[twitch]

Flukey injuries occur no matter how many carries a guy has. But to make the point on 2 of these 400 carry RBs, Terrell Davis and Jamal Anderson's injuries had absolutely nothing to do with their previous work, imo. Davis tore his ACL tacking a defensive player after his own QB was picked off. 400 carries or 4 wouldnt have factored in there. And Jamal Anderson tore his ACL making a ridiculous cut behind the line of scrimmage before he ever got touched. The Falcons were still playing on the old-school, rock-slab turf back then, and non-contact injuries happened all the time all over the field. But of course both of these players were hurt following heavy workloads so they fall into the mythical 400 carry fall-off conspiracy. Everyone here is a stat freak, so the #s can be drubbed up from every angle. So where are all the #s supporting why players who havent had 400 carries suck?? How many carries did Cadillac Williams have before last year? And Greg Jones?....was he coming off a career high in carries in '05? Deshaun Foster? Domanick Davis? Tatum Bell? Ronnie Brown? Jamal Lewis? They all struggled last year, and NONE had 400 carries. So we can bash LJ for any # of reasons, but I totally agree that the workload is not relevant here.