2017 Running Back Report

[lukkynumber13]

Also had to take take SOMEONE at the dreaded 1.07 spot yesterday, and settled on Hunt. I hope he hits!

Holy crap! Good luck.

Haha I know. I hated it. But it's a salary cap league that favors RBs, so there was no way I wanted to take a TE, and couldn't justify JuJu or Ross.

[nathanq42]

I'm all for the work that's been done by DD, but presuming to not question someone else's ranking (especially when they won't even provide their reasoning) seems a bit silly to me and I'm skeptical of anyone who claims their system is more successful than any NFL scout has ever been at picking stud RBs. A system that can supposedly predict every stud RB over a decade sounds pretty far-fetched...

The pattern is speed in relation to your weight and college production. For C-Mac and Cook, they're just not that fast for their height/weight.

Then how was Le'Veon Bell predicted as a stud?

Many metrics people believe that elite speed is the biggest indictator of RB success. Rotoviz has a similar formula for their RB Prospect Lab, and coincidentally Leonard Fournette and D'Onta Foreman graded the highest.

That's not true. CMC scored 3rd - ahead of both Mixon and Fournette and they specifically cited his elite athleticism as a reason why: http://rotoviz.com/2017/04/2017-rb-pros ... vid=3vzy42

DD does explain his reasoning... He just doesn't go into lengthy detail about all of his weighting on the metrics inputs in his spreadsheet, that would be long, and dry

DD literally addressed bell in his intro....

And that article you cited literally said he was lacking in the speed department... Which I bet DD weights a tad higher than rotoviz does based on their rankings.

[Shcritters]

DD - thanks for putting this together, really appreciate it. For the sake of the forum, ignore the barbs from people, you don't need to explain yourself. People can take this for what its worth or not.

I have the 1.03 and was hoping Mixon would make it to the top tier. Now this tells me I should either try to trade up or hope someone does something silly by passing on Davis or LF. I've also got the 1.10, and that seems a little early to take Foreman, so I'll likely have to trade back or try to acquire another pick if I want him (or just take him there).

Thanks for sharing - really appreciate it.

[Cameron Giles]

Then how was Le'Veon Bell predicted as a stud?

I think Bell made the list because of his college production profile. But, I think the reason he's as good as he is now is because he improved like maybe no other RB has. His vision and run style completely changed.

That's not true. CMC scored 3rd - ahead of both Mixon and Fournette and they specifically cited his elite athleticism as a reason why: http://rotoviz.com/2017/04/2017-rb-pros ... vid=3vzy42

Sorry, I referenced the wrong model. I meant the RB Success Model. Rotoviz has 2 models:

1. The RB Prospect Lab - this scores RB's based on combine data and compares them to past prospects with similar metrics
2. The RB Success Model - this uses 40yd/weight/final rushing yards/final receiving yards to predict success

In #2, Foreman (53%) and Fournette (44%) are ranked the highest. C-Mac is 28% and Cook 23%.

Regardless, none of this dismisses C-Mac as an NFL player. I think he'll have a long, productive career. However, this (along with plenty of other things) confirms his biggest red flags:

1. He's not that fast for his size.
2. He's not strong enough to be a lead back.
3. Because of #2, it's likely that a team invests in an early down RB at some point.
4. He's more of a weapon than an RB.

He's like a supercharged Giovani Bernard.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

DD - thanks for putting this together, really appreciate it. For the sake of the forum, ignore the barbs from people, you don't need to explain yourself. People can take this for what its worth or not.

I have the 1.03 and was hoping Mixon would make it to the top tier. Now this tells me I should either try to trade up or hope someone does something silly by passing on Davis or LF. I've also got the 1.10, and that seems a little early to take Foreman, so I'll likely have to trade back or try to acquire another pick if I want him (or just take him there).

Thanks for sharing - really appreciate it.

Thanks. I don't mind a constructive discussion. Unfortunately it's not always constructive.

Yes, the 1.03 is a tricky spot to be in this year. Mixon should be a decent player, but the odds of having a much better player are just beyond your fingertips. I actually owned the 1.03 in one of my leagues this year and ended up trading it in a package for ARob. Now if Bortles would just get his act together


As for the bench press thing, I know CMC has been compared to Reggie Bush. Similar height/weight. Just a little food for thought, Bush put up 24 reps compared to CMC's 10. Additionally, Darren Sproles (another passing down specialist) weighed 185 lbs and put up 23 reps.

[izekial]

man, this went up hours after my draft, lol

anytime someone does alot of research and analysis and puts it up for free, im going to appreciate it. so thank you.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

2. The RB Success Model - this uses 40yd/weight/final rushing yards/final receiving yards to predict success

In #2, Foreman (53%) and Fournette (44%) are ranked the highest. C-Mac is 28% and Cook 23%.

Interesting. People are starting to catch on.

Another person who has pegged Foreman for big things is also on this very forum.

[TTHTD]

That's not true. CMC scored 3rd - ahead of both Mixon and Fournette and they specifically cited his elite athleticism as a reason why: http://rotoviz.com/2017/04/2017-rb-pros ... vid=3vzy42

Sorry, I referenced the wrong model. I meant the RB Success Model. Rotoviz has 2 models:

1. The RB Prospect Lab - this scores RB's based on combine data and compares them to past prospects with similar metrics
2. The RB Success Model - this uses 40yd/weight/final rushing yards/final receiving yards to predict success

The guy who writes the success model articles goes on to write more about his process in another article. He openly admits that weight adjusted 40 is conditioned by 3-cone and agility measurements when determining success. http://rotoviz.com/2016/02/which-measur ... vid=4cwUNh

CMC's elite numbers in every category besides speed more than make up for having 'just adequate' speed. He'll feed the same exact way Shady feeds.

Me thinks someone has not read the entire report. I've pretty much answered both of those statements/questions already.

So it has, but the reasoning seems arbitrary I guess. Please don't think me rude for kicking the tires on your contribution, I'm just not the kind of person who swallows things people on the internet tell me wholesale and typically when people post their systems online they're looking for feedback and criticism as well as praise. Just trying to help.

[moishetreats]

Very simply: Thank you SO much, DD. I am deeply appreciative of your time and effort and your willingness to share the results of your work!

[Coogan Football]

I applaud DD's effort for another great contribution, this is definitely an entertaining read.


But remember folks, scouting players isn't just this simple and there's always tons of other factors that to into a player's success. Whether you like analytics or tape to help you formulate your opinion of a player just remember that you should always "do your own work" to some extent and form your own player rankings.

[ajmyk]

Thanks for sharing

This is a technical question, but I assume that when you started this project, you looked at previous players stats and production to make your model, so they're basically the Training Set.

Do you actualise the model to include in the training, the most recent productions and the new players or do you keep it as it is ?

Also if you get, say, a 80% success rate on the Training Set of players in the studs category, you can't except this rate to apply to new players unless you get a lot more data. I have to assume there is a lot of overfitting here, but that's OK you CAN'T do better with this kind of data.

Still, sound like your track record is great for especially if you predicted DJ. (Sadly, I went to check and saw that you deleted your opening post in the 2015 thread, not that i doubt it, the reactions are there, but was curious to see the write up)

[zelldawg26]

This is awesome, thank you!
Coming up June 1st I own the 1.07 and 1.12. Kind of feels like a major stretch to reach for Foreman at 1.12 but don't think he'll be there at the 2.07. I love his college stats and can totally see a work horse there in Houston.
I must say though, with all the positive feed on Joe Williams, Perine and others, this is gonna be tough to pull the trigger on.

[schiewerma21]

Good stuff. Yea the workhorse model favors bigger faster rbs as historically that's what is a huge predictor of success. (Rotoviz does a very similar predictive model where his top 3 was their top 3)

Dalvin cook sucks no surprise here. Worst yards created in the class with 7 or more in box. Used the counter to get the edge on most of his big runs. Getting the edge is much more difficult in the NFL.

Surprised to see hunt so high (I love him personally) but he doesn't fit the other 3 mentioned.

Marlon Mack isn't worth mentioned. An okay athlete trying to play rb. Bounces everything to outside and might be the weakest rb I have ever watched.

Mccaffrey I think has a place in the NFL but I do think he's overvalued because we all are looking at him through best case lenses at the moment. But I do like him more than where he's listed here.

[Nanananananana]

DD - thanks for putting this together, really appreciate it. For the sake of the forum, ignore the barbs from people, you don't need to explain yourself. People can take this for what its worth or not.

I have the 1.03 and was hoping Mixon would make it to the top tier. Now this tells me I should either try to trade up or hope someone does something silly by passing on Davis or LF. I've also got the 1.10, and that seems a little early to take Foreman, so I'll likely have to trade back or try to acquire another pick if I want him (or just take him there).

Thanks for sharing - really appreciate it.

I really enjoyed reading this report and appreciate all the effort that went into it great job.

But dude you're going to change your pick based on a post on DLF??? I'm sure you did hours of research over the off-season like everybody else and settled on Mixon and now right befor the draft you are just going to switch it up because someone else doesn't like him. Ingest all input but ultimately make your own decisions.

[SteveVolk]

This was fun, regardless, and provides good grist for thinking about who to draft and when. I do have one question on the model and how it relates to the coming years: I suspect guys like Bell and McCaffrey might not show well in a model based on past results because they are something very new—ie., they bust the model. Just on tape, Bell is—at least arguably—the single best back in football, in a tier of his own. His running style and ability to catch are singular. His three cone for a man his size was historic and he looks like a historically successful back so far, too, with that three cone showing up all the time. I suspect McCaffrey represents a similar, New NFL Back sort of prototype. His change of direction skills and ability to make defenders miss in tiny spaces is straight out of a video game. That said, the model strikes me as solid otherwise, and last night I managed to get Foreman at 2.12 in one of my leagues. Cheers! —Steve