Dynasty League Football Forum

Huh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:26 pm

Phaded wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:07 pm Good lord - can this community stop using YPC as an argument in favour of players who do not even hit triple digit carries?
It is no secret that you should have a higher YPC with lesser carries and that it lowers when you get more carries, generally.

It rarely works out when they get a larger workload.

I’m a Damien truther but I agree. Ypc should not even be mentioned when talking about a rb. It should be the chiefs ran for 5.2 yards per carry, not Williams ran for 5.2 yards per carry.

It is being used to compare backs in the same system at the same time. It’s not a perfect stat, even in that context, but anyone that understands it’s limitations can still use it meaningfully. Every stat has limitations, some are better than others, but YPC is by no means useless. Extend it to it’s theoretical limits: 2 backs share carries in a backfield. They each have 50 carries. One runs for 50 ypc, the other -10 ypc. In this instance ypc tells 100% enough of the story between these two backs for us to make perfectly accurate assumptions about which was better in a general sense at running the ball. In another scenario one back may gain 3.3 ypc while the other gains 4.9 ypc. In that case ypc doesn’t show everything meaningful between the two backs performance like in the first case, and other stats could be very helpful, but it sure as heck shows enough to inform any of us a whole lot about the situation and the overwhelming likelihood of which back was better.

So basically, it isn’t a perfect stat, and many others were cited, including many different defense adjusted stats, but ypc is by no means useless or even a bad stat if just viewed in context.

Elroypedro wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:50 pm

Huh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:26 pm

Phaded wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:07 pm Good lord - can this community stop using YPC as an argument in favour of players who do not even hit triple digit carries?
It is no secret that you should have a higher YPC with lesser carries and that it lowers when you get more carries, generally.

It rarely works out when they get a larger workload.

I’m a Damien truther but I agree. Ypc should not even be mentioned when talking about a rb. It should be the chiefs ran for 5.2 yards per carry, not Williams ran for 5.2 yards per carry.

It is being used to compare backs in the same system at the same time. It’s not a perfect stat, even in that context, but anyone that understands it’s limitations can still use it meaningfully. Every stat has limitations, some are better than others, but YPC is by no means useless. Extend it to it’s theoretical limits: 2 backs share carries in a backfield. They each have 50 carries. One runs for 50 ypc, the other -10 ypc. In this instance ypc tells 100% enough of the story between these two backs for us to make perfectly accurate assumptions about which was better in a general sense at running the ball. In another scenario one back may gain 3.3 ypc while the other gains 4.9 ypc. In that case ypc doesn’t show everything meaningful between the two backs performance like in the first case, and other stats could be very helpful, but it sure as heck shows enough to inform any of us a whole lot about the situation and the overwhelming likelihood of which back was better.

So basically, it isn’t a perfect stat, and many others were cited, including many different defense adjusted stats, but ypc is by no means useless or even a bad stat if just viewed in context.

That’s actually incorrect. That wouldn’t explain the difference if one RB is a 1st and 2nd down back and the other is the third down back. Or if a rb is always used in short yard and goal line situations. But thanks for reaching us a lesson on context.

thebeast wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:56 pm

Elroypedro wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:50 pm

Huh wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 4:26 pm

I’m a Damien truther but I agree. Ypc should not even be mentioned when talking about a rb. It should be the chiefs ran for 5.2 yards per carry, not Williams ran for 5.2 yards per carry.

It is being used to compare backs in the same system at the same time. It’s not a perfect stat, even in that context, but anyone that understands it’s limitations can still use it meaningfully. Every stat has limitations, some are better than others, but YPC is by no means useless. Extend it to it’s theoretical limits: 2 backs share carries in a backfield. They each have 50 carries. One runs for 50 ypc, the other -10 ypc. In this instance ypc tells 100% enough of the story between these two backs for us to make perfectly accurate assumptions about which was better in a general sense at running the ball. In another scenario one back may gain 3.3 ypc while the other gains 4.9 ypc. In that case ypc doesn’t show everything meaningful between the two backs performance like in the first case, and other stats could be very helpful, but it sure as heck shows enough to inform any of us a whole lot about the situation and the overwhelming likelihood of which back was better.

So basically, it isn’t a perfect stat, and many others were cited, including many different defense adjusted stats, but ypc is by no means useless or even a bad stat if just viewed in context.

That’s actually incorrect. That wouldn’t explain the difference if one RB is a 1st and 2nd down back and the other is the third down back. Or if a rb is always used in short yard and goal line situations. But thanks for reaching us a lesson on context.

You’re saying it doesn’t work without context, which is what I said. This stuff isn’t complicated. Ypc is a fine stat for what it is.

ninotoreS wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:12 pm With Houston released and Ford traded, it is practically guaranteed KC is targeting multiple pass-rushers from this class (which appears to be rich in them) on Days 1 and 2.

They need so much defensive starters/depth right now.

Even if they took an RB Day 3, it's looking like Williams is going to be the back to play in this offense.

Double Post

KC does have a 1st and 2x 2nds in 2019 and 2020. They could definitely get away with taking an RB in the second either of the next two drafts, that would only be a minor surprise. It’s really just wait and see what they do in the draft, or if they re-sign Ware or West or another surprise FA. Hurry up and wait

Cameron Giles wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 5:32 pm

ninotoreS wrote: ↑Tue Mar 12, 2019 6:12 pm With Houston released and Ford traded, it is practically guaranteed KC is targeting multiple pass-rushers from this class (which appears to be rich in them) on Days 1 and 2.

They need so much defensive starters/depth right now.

Even if they took an RB Day 3, it's looking like Williams is going to be the back to play in this offense.

Day three backs in this draft would have been undrafted in the last few. This class stiiiiinks.

I'm puzzled by Ingram getting 3 years for 15 mil while Hyde got 1 year for 2.8mil. Baltimore got great value. After KC cut Eric Berry, you'd think they'd have had enough money to get in on that value.

Was just curious what the actual numbers are that Damien Williams was on pace for on his 6 game tear(where he sat most of one of those games in Week 17) to end the season and into the playoffs. And since this is the theme of the thread: “convince me,” thought I’d post what I found.

Damien Williams in 6 games:
82 carries, 414y, 5.0ypc, 6 TD, 1 fumble
35 targets, 30 receptions, 7.7ypr, 233y, 4 TD, 0 drops
136.7 half PPR points - 22.8ppg

Extrapolated to 16 games:
218 carries, 1104y, 5.0ypc, 16 TD, 2 fumbles
93 targets, 80 receptions, 621y, 7.7ypr, 10 TD, 0 drops
364.5 half PPR points - 22.8ppg


For reference:

Todd Gurleys half PPR points by year:
2015 - 197.9(12 games) - 16.5ppg
2016 - 176.7 - 11.0ppg
2017 - 351.3(15 games) - 23.4ppg
2018 - 342.6(14 games) - 24.4ppg

Kareem Hunt half PPR points by year:
2017 - 268.7 - 16.8ppg
2018 - 217.2(11 games) - 19.7ppg


Not groundbreaking work here and not 100% relevant to the situation going forward but it shows 1) his capability to be a top 3 RB if given the lead role and 2) that KC might not be crazy to be relying on him and not signing a big FA.

Advanced stats wise he is better than Kareem Hunt in about 3 categories for every 1 that Hunt is better than him. Hunt is more elusive and better breaking tackles, and has more ypr. Williams is a better pass blocker, has better hands, and is a better runner against all different defensive sets and every offensive set except for under center, and is much better than Hunt running the ball overall defense adjusted. Williams is also the better option at the GL by a wide margin. Basically, anyone who thinks Hunt was good enough for KC to be a contender should be even higher on KC with Williams.

The big question remains, is it Hunt and Williams or is it the system. Probably both, but that is good enough for KC to have the option to keep Williams as their starter and still have one of the top producing backs in the league rolling out for them every week if they don’t want to spend cap or draft capital to replace him.


And to the above poster asking why not pay up for Mark Ingram? Perhaps a glimpse of why is because D Williams outproduced Ingram in by more than 12ppg half PPR. In 14 games Ingram had 145.9 half PPR points, or 10.1ppg. Basically a borderline flex player in a great situation for him in NO. As above, Williams almost outscored that in just 6 games played, and more than doubled Ingram’s ppg.

Again, disclaimer, these stats aren’t foolproof or focused or robust or anything. They’re just to give any idea of how dominant Williams was when given the chance last year and how KC could very easily feel comfortable with him as their lead in 2019. Take it for whatever you want, it is interesting to see if nothing else.

Elroypedro wrote: ↑Thu Mar 14, 2019 8:41 pm Was just curious what the actual numbers are that Damien Williams was on pace for on his 6 game tear(where he sat most of one of those games in Week 17) to end the season and into the playoffs. And since this is the theme of the thread: “convince me,” thought I’d post what I found.

Damien Williams in 6 games:
82 carries, 414y, 5.0ypc, 6 TD, 1 fumble
35 targets, 30 receptions, 7.7ypr, 233y, 4 TD, 0 drops
136.7 half PPR points - 22.8ppg

Extrapolated to 16 games:
218 carries, 1104y, 5.0ypc, 16 TD, 2 fumbles
93 targets, 80 receptions, 621y, 7.7ypr, 10 TD, 0 drops
364.5 half PPR points - 22.8ppg

So with the kind off logic you apply to data -> Williams couldn't beat out Lamar in MIA, then Lamar must be able to do 23/24+ ppg in KC. Cause he was clearly better than Dwill, so that would indicate we should add a couple of PPG to Lamar in KC.

I appreciate you guys that post stats to back up your arguments and really it could go either way. Focusing on the eyeball test I watched most of kcs games last year and Williams looked like he was continuously shot out of a canon and looked nothing like the Miami Williams. Also, I read that he was voted the hardest working chiefs player last year which might explain his success. Let's hope his hunger to succeed continues next year and his work ethic remains strong.

Oh great.. So now on top of YPC there is now extrapolating a small sample size.. Not flawed at all..

You can tell when some people are newer to this.

Extrapolation is the most worthless concept to prove a point because it never works out like that.

Phaded wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 3:43 am Oh great.. So now on top of YPC there is now extrapolating a small sample size.. Not flawed at all..

You can tell when some people are newer to this.

Extrapolation is the most worthless concept to prove a point because it never works out like that.

Elroy once used less than a 5 carry sample for YPC. Think it was Penny

CAUTION; For all the love of D. Williams and all the extrapolation going on with Stats remember this.

Williams has been in the NFL 5 years. He has played in 74 regular season games and has a grand total of 733 yards rushing in those games. He is in no way shape or form on par with K Hunt or much less the earlier comparison of Todd Gurley.

Williams has had 3 games over 50 yards rushing in his career and one of those was in the playoffs last season. He has had 1 regular season game of 103 yards and did have one good game in the playoffs for his only other 100 plus game rushing. His last game last year he had 30 yards rushing.

Hanging your hat on two good rushing games for this career back up thinking he is any type of long term solution is a massive reach.

We have a 5 year book on this player. I would just caution the fantasy community to be careful. Nothing wrong with hoping or riding the wave but take off the rose colored glasses with this complimentary asset.

The Chiefs like him and he stepped up but they too have a complete book on him for the year in practice and games for the entire season.

He may practice hard and be a great guy but he is a very average runner and ultimately the team will look for a RB that can carry the rock over the long term. Expect the Chiefs to draft a RB.

Jigga94 wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 3:48 am

Phaded wrote: ↑Fri Mar 15, 2019 3:43 am Oh great.. So now on top of YPC there is now extrapolating a small sample size.. Not flawed at all..

You can tell when some people are newer to this.

Extrapolation is the most worthless concept to prove a point because it never works out like that.

Elroy once used less than a 5 carry sample for YPC. Think it was Penny

Just a case of extreme ownership bias; something that has been going on a lot around here lately.