For sure, my point is that for a sample size as low as 11 they'd have to be near identical situations to Akers for me to be comfortable pulling actionable info from it.FantasyFreak wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:56 pmNo 2 circumstances are identical, and I think the most similar one we can pin is Foreman. Day 2 pick, similar speed score, huge college production, tore his achilles at a similar age, and only a few years ago, so surgical procedures are relevant. However his outcome doesn't determine Akers outcome. I think there potential outcomes are interesting. I think Akers has a shot to be the first RB to be a relevant player after an achilles, beyond a year or two. Being a better prospect than most who have suffered the injury, combined with better medical treatment than those came before, I think he has a good shot at getting a 2nd contract in the NFL (and I sincerely hope he does). Being a lead back for multiple years in an NFL offense, and being a FF producer that people are trading multiple firsts for? I think the chances on that are slim to none.Sriracha wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 8:16 pmAkers circumstance is not identical (or even similar) to all 11 of those players— most of which I’d venture to say had far worse than a 50/50 chance to bounce back in the NFL with or without the Achilles injury.Ruggenater wrote: ↑Thu Jul 29, 2021 12:39 pm
Pretty much everything NFL/fantasy-related is small samples. We only have (had) 16 game seasons, which is a tiny sample size. There’s a reason analytics were developed earlier and are further along in baseball.
Say you assume the “real” chances of coming back and being effective after an Achilles injury is 50/50. Then your expectation for 11 cases is 5.5 successfully returning, and 5.5 failing to. The standard deviation assuming normal distribution and 11 trials is 1.66, putting 11 failures in 11 trials more than 3 standard deviations from the mean, which, despite small sample size, is fairly compelling evidence that it’s not 50/50. Simplified example/way of looking at this, yes, but there’s nothing to point to that shows betting on Akers to be a good bet.
The closest one is probably either Mikel Leshour or D'onta Foreman but neither of them were as good of a prospect as Akers imo and neither of them showed out like Akers did at any point in their careers.
Foreman was a 3rd round pick with a very replaceable skillset (2 down grinder) and for what it's worth in his limited sample of work with TEN he looked to be completely back to his old self -- and his YPC going from 4.1 his rookie year to 4.2 with the Titans should attest to the fact that he didn't fall off of an athletic cliff... he just isn't a difference maker at the position.
For people that were down on Akers talent level and were only forced to accept his value as the lead back in McVay's offense I completely understand writing him off at this point -- but I'm obviously a believer in his talent level prior to the injury.
Akers has lost about 1/2 of his value imo due to losing a year in his prime and the uncertainty around his ability to comeback in the future or LAR's decision to possibly move on from him with a Shiny new toy in 2022.
Where we differ here is that I believe his floor has been lowered, not his ceiling; if he returns to near identical form in 2022 while proving to be a 3 down back I could easily see his value eclipsing multiple 1sts.