NFL running backs

[ QUOTE ]
I cant think of one team that would say their lack of a premier running back is their biggest problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Patriots come to mind...

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
Um, yeah, 1236 and 1335 aren't very good years for running backs that get the ball 339 times,

[/ QUOTE ]
How about for backs that are either their team's only offensive threat and/or are stacked up versus?

Also, carrying the ball 339 times isn't a detriment. Many back can't handle the ball that often. Adding in the about 400 yards receiving each year makes your statement more than laughable. 1700 NFL yards could never be considered subpar or terrible, unless only measured versus his own lofty standards.

[Daliman]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I cant think of one team that would say their lack of a premier running back is their biggest problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Patriots come to mind...

[/ QUOTE ]
They have one. Does 1635 yards in 2004 ring any bells? They just need him to stay healthy.

[Rick Diesel]

[ QUOTE ]
Mo Morris runs for 1500 yards and 15 TDs next season.

[/ QUOTE ]

Man I hope you are right. I grabbed Mo Morris in the 12th round of my keeper league draft, and I have Larry Johnson in the 15th round, so I will be set for years to come. I think I just got wood. Yes, I am pathetic.

[Sluss]

[ QUOTE ]
RUSHING
Year Team G GS Att Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ FD
2001 San Diego Chargers 16 16 339 1236 3.6 54 10 7 67
2004 San Diego Chargers 15 15 339 1335 3.9 42 17 6 68

Pretty bad and below average?

I'm beginning to think you don't know as much about football as you think you do.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Um, yeah, 1236 and 1335 aren't very good years for running backs that get the ball 339 times,


[/ QUOTE ]
Yea, we have had this argument before. Jack has a big hard-on for YPC. We accept this and still love him.

[Jack of Arcades]

If we cloned Cristian Guzman and we were able to bat him 5400 times a year, he'd end up with, oh, 1100 hits on the year. Would he be the ebst hitter in the league? No, not at all because on an AB-by-AB basis he'd have a negative value.

[SCfuji]

well if jack is gonna argue ypc im going to argue sample size

2001 SAN DIEGO 339 1236 3.6 10
2002 SAN DIEGO 372 1683 4.5 14
2003 SAN DIEGO 313 1645 5.3 13
2004 SAN DIEGO 339 1335 3.9 17
2005 SAN DIEGO 236 1086 4.6 17

the more carries a back gets his ypc should get closer and closer to his true ypc right? looks awesome to me if i can get an average of 4 and a fraction ypc from my back. well have to wait on how 2005 ends up. i think it is interesting to look at the numbers on an average basis but then again if you want to look at averages on the small scale i think you have to look at them at the mid (per game) and large (per season) basis. this is random but im going to give LT himself an EV of 10 points a game. thats pretty [censored] cool to have from one position.

[Jack of Arcades]

[ QUOTE ]
well if jack is gonna argue ypc im going to argue sample size

[/ QUOTE ]

That has no relevance here. We aren't arguing about his talent, we're arguing about his *production*. And in 2001 and 2004 he was below average production-wise. We're not trying to extrapolate anything about his skill.

[SCfuji]

and in 2002, 2003, and 2005 so far hes above par. if you are looking for a rb that gets 300+ carriers a year for a ten year career and averaged 5+ ypc he doesnt exist. seriously, why such high standards? LT isnt good enough for you? lt has *produced* more than most hall of famer running backs five seasons into their respective careers. and why doesnt sample size matter? i could pull out some no name third stringer that got one carry for ten yards and say, "hey JoA this dude gets 10.0 ypc. hes the best!".

[NLSoldier]

[ QUOTE ]
this is random but im going to give LT himself an EV of 10 points a game. thats pretty [censored] cool to have from one position.

[/ QUOTE ]

you are giving LT an EV of 10 pts a game relative to what? having no RB? having the worst starting RB in the league? having the avg starting RB in the league? Having the 2nd best RB in the league? Unless you are comparing to having no RB, you are clearly wrong.