Unlock More Content Like This With A
Footballguys Premium Subscription
"Footballguys is the best premium
fantasy football only site on the planet."
Matthew Berry, NBC Sports EDGE
It’s at the cross section of talent and opportunity where championships are spawned. We target players that see a high market share of productive stats—from targets to carries to red zone looks—while also emphasizing their physical abilities to convert those stats into something tangible, i.e., fantasy points. Generally speaking, the capital gain of players that are both talented and featured is reflected in their average draft positions.
Unfortunately, at that same intersection lie infertile offenses—ones whose swirling inconsistencies often become a black hole for fantasy points. Although the talent and opportunity are equally present, the lack of volume might diminish value. Some have risen above it, think Maurice Jones-Drew. Others, like Larry Fitzgerald, get sucked into the vortex only to frustrate owners.
Compound mediocre offenses with the threat of injuries and you might find full on panic-based drafting. But the question remains, should we fear good players on bad offenses? Or should we target them because others aren’t?
Snap Counts, Points Scored and the Misrepresentation of Volume
In the table below you’ll find the five teams that ran the fewest offensive snaps in 2013. What’s interesting is that we have a Super Bowl winner, a Super Bowl contender and a team that just missed the playoffs for the third year in a row.
Rank | Team | Points | Yards | Offensive Snaps |
---|---|---|---|---|
28 | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 288 | 4432 | 981 |
29 | Seattle Seahawks | 417 | 5424 | 973 |
30 | St. Louis Rams | 348 | 4877 | 968 |
31 | San Francisco 49ers | 406 | 5180 | 961 |
32 | Dallas Cowboys | 439 | 5458 | 957 |
Next we have the five teams that ran the most offensive snaps in 2013. Again, we have a Super Bowl loser, a Super Bowl contender and a team that just barely missed the playoffs.
Rank | Team | Points | Yards | Offensive Snaps |
---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Denver Broncos | 606 | 7317 | 1156 |
2 | New England Patriots | 444 | 6152 | 1138 |
3 | Buffalo Bills | 339 | 5410 | 1116 |
4 | Washington Redskins | 334 | 5915 | 1107 |
5 | Detroit Lions | 395 | 6274 | 1102 |
What this tells us is that running more snaps doesn’t equal scoring more points. So if we’re using volume as an indicator of productivity, we need to make sure we’re using the right kind of volume. Points scored per snap are more important than snaps run per team.
Rank | Team | Points | Yards | Snaps | Points Per Snap |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Denver Broncos | 606 | 7317 | 1156 | 0.52 |
2 | Dallas Cowboys | 439 | 5458 | 957 | 0.46 |
3 | Chicago Bears | 445 | 6109 | 1013 | 0.44 |
4 | Seattle Seahawks | 417 | 5424 | 973 | 0.43 |
5 | San Francisco 49ers | 406 | 5180 | 961 | 0.42 |
6 | Philadelphia Eagles | 442 | 6676 | 1054 | 0.42 |
7 | Kansas City Chiefs | 430 | 5396 | 1029 | 0.42 |
8 | Cincinnati Bengals | 430 | 5891 | 1097 | 0.39 |
9 | New England Patriots | 444 | 6152 | 1138 | 0.39 |
10 | Green Bay Packers | 417 | 6404 | 1074 | 0.39 |
11 | Minnesota Vikings | 391 | 5508 | 1013 | 0.39 |
12 | New Orleans Saints | 414 | 6391 | 1079 | 0.38 |
13 | Indianapolis Colts | 391 | 5468 | 1023 | 0.38 |
14 | San Diego Chargers | 396 | 6293 | 1060 | 0.37 |
15 | Pittsburgh Steelers | 379 | 5400 | 1023 | 0.37 |
16 | Carolina Panthers | 366 | 5069 | 999 | 0.37 |
17 | Arizona Cardinals | 379 | 5542 | 1037 | 0.37 |
18 | St. Louis Rams | 348 | 4877 | 968 | 0.36 |
19 | Detroit Lions | 395 | 6274 | 1102 | 0.36 |
20 | Tennessee Titans | 362 | 5390 | 1032 | 0.35 |
21 | Atlanta Falcons | 353 | 5490 | 1024 | 0.34 |
22 | Oakland Raiders | 322 | 5340 | 1000 | 0.32 |
23 | Miami Dolphins | 317 | 5007 | 1001 | 0.32 |
24 | Buffalo Bills | 339 | 5410 | 1116 | 0.3 |
25 | Washington Redskins | 334 | 5915 | 1107 | 0.3 |
26 | New York Giants | 294 | 4920 | 988 | 0.3 |
27 | Baltimore Ravens | 320 | 4918 | 1090 | 0.29 |
28 | Tampa Bay Buccaneers | 288 | 4432 | 981 | 0.29 |
29 | Cleveland Browns | 308 | 5423 | 1078 | 0.29 |
30 | New York Jets | 290 | 5090 | 1020 | 0.28 |
31 | Houston Texans | 276 | 5556 | 1089 | 0.25 |
32 | Jacksonville Jaguars | 247 | 4701 | 1020 | 0.24 |
Notice that three of the top five teams represented in terms of PPS, or points per snap, were bottom five in snaps run. You might think sample size is the issue—naturally a team who runs fewer snaps is going to average more points per snap. But that’s not always the case. The Cowboys ranked fifth in total points despite finishing last in offensive snaps. The Seahawks were just three spots behind them in points scored, yet ran fewer plays than all but three other teams. Note that the defenses of these two teams were polar opposites, suggesting that defensive performance has little influence on the number of offensive snaps and resulting points.
The lesson in all of this is that volume can be represented in more ways than one. Just because a team runs a lot of plays doesn’t mean they’ll score a lot of points. Teams found in Buffalo, Washington and Houston all finished in the top 10 in snaps counts, but bottom 10 in total points scored.
I’ll grant that quarterback play, and the overall talent of an offense, has a lot to do with the resulting production. That’s true of every element of football. But it’s not as if Buffalo and Washington are inadequate in the talent department. And it’s not as if the Seahawks loaded with offensive playmakers. We can use PPS as a projection of which teams are successful when they have the ball. We want players on teams that score a lot of points, regardless of how many chances they’ll get to score a lot of points.
Fear-Based Drafting: Good Players on Bad Teams
A study in average draft position generally yields a risk/reward value driven result. Players drafted in the first round will always represent the lowest value and in some cases the highest risk. But we view them as safe simply because they exemplify the highest ratio of talent vs. opportunity, meaning they are both extremely talented and in most cases play for teams that put them in a position to succeed.
The nucleus of our teams will be built in the first five rounds of the draft. But after round one both talent and opportunity fade. Checking the ADP of rounds two through five, we need to assess which players are tied to offenses that should scare us away and use that as a means of tiebreaker between players with equal ranks.
Round 2
You don’t need me to tell you how important it is to nail your first two draft picks. Sure, you might be able to hover around .500 if you miss on one of these two selections, but it goes without saying that finding weekly consistency is easier here than from the waiver wire or your bench.
The second round represents two players with glaring concerns regarding their respective teams: Arian Foster and Alfred Morris.
The Texans were the definition of a dumpster fire offense last year. They cycled through three different quarterbacks, lost their best player to injury and ultimately finished with the worst record in football at 2-14.
Foster is coming off the board at 17th overall. One would think his history of injuries combined with the uncertainty of his offense would tank his ADP. In fact, 63 percent of analysts rank him worse that his current draft slot.
You already know the bad news: the Houston Texans offense is now led by Ryan Fitzpatrick. To say he’s an upgrade on the likes of Matt Schaub and Case Keenum is akin to polishing turds. The good news is that Fitzpatrick’s offense in Buffalo, despite finishing in the bottom-10 or worse all four years, still had a running back finish no worse than 22nd in total fantasy points, and included two top-12 finishes (PPR, Weeks 1-16). Foster still gets the benefit of a good offensive line and the blessing of Bill O’Brien as a three-down, pass-catching back.
Assuming health, which I admit is a major concern, Foster is in line for a big season especially in PPR leagues. If you’ve missed out on a stud receiver, I have no problem grabbing him at his current spot.
Later that same round, we find Alfred Morris who got a taste of regression after dropping 11 spots from his rookie finish of ninth in 2012 to 20th last year. In my eyes this is more in line with his skill set and role within the offense. He’ll get plenty of carries, especially around the goal line, but his ceiling will always be capped by his lack of receptions and the fact that he’s a bit one dimensional.
He’s coming off of the board as the 13th running back and it’s well within reason that he’ll finish near that rank. But it’s doubtful he’ll finish above it. If you’re forced into taking a running back at the back half of the second round, I’d recommend overcoming your fears and going with Foster.
Round 3
Zac Stacy, Doug Martin, C.J. Spiller, Andre Ellington and Rashad Jennings are all being drafted in the third round and not one of them finished better than 19th last year. All of them were associated with below average offenses and/or missed significant time with injury. Again, we need to identify who represents the least amount of risk and offers the most talent and opportunity.
Jennings might be the least talented of the group from a metrics standpoint. But he’s probably the most durable and has great hands. Unfortunately, despite his strength and size, early indications are that he’ll lose out on goal line carries to Andre Williams. Still, the Giants are playing under a new system that features more of a dink-and-dunk offense. You could argue Jennings yards and receptions will be enough to make up for his lack of touchdowns should Williams continue to hog goal line looks.
Spiller is in a nasty timeshare with Fred Jackson. He’s only eclipsed the 50 percent mark in snap counts once and that was in his stellar 2012 campaign. There’s no question about his talent. His skill-set is comparable to Jamaal Charles. All he needs is opportunity. I’m more bullish on the Bills offense than most but it’s going to be difficult to predict when Spiller is going to have a big day. Boom or bust options are not a wise investment this early in the draft.
Stacy, Martin and Ellington feature similar skill-sets and similar offenses that struggle to make use of those skill-sets. From an opportunity standpoint I’m inclined to plug Stacy as your most likely to see high volume with little competition for carries. His offense has been perennially bad but head coach Jeff Fisher doesn’t abandon the run and with a healthy Sam Bradford, we may see the Rams finally turn things around this year.
The truth of the matter is that I’m avoiding all of these offenses in this particular round. I’d much rather grab the likes of Rob Gronkowski and Julius Thomas—should they be available—or reach for someone like Roddy White. Randall Cobb and Keenan Allen are also usually available in Round 3. They are a much better option than all of the aforementioned running backs.
Round 4
There are two intriguing running backs coming out of the fourth round that have long been on the preseason hype machine.
Toby Gerhart is the first name on the list. He is taking his talents to Jacksonville to fill the role that formerly belonged to Jones-Drew. The Jaguars were one of the worst teams last year and managed to finish last in both points scored and points per snap, and finished second-to-last in yards per game. They were impressively horrible and the exact type of fantasy football environment we should avoid.
So why is Gerhart, who has been covered up by Adrian Peterson his entire career, barely missing the third round in drafts? To answer that question let’s journey over to Playerprofile.com and ogle his metrics.
Gerhart promises a great combination of speed and durability. His agility score of 11.19 is actually better than Peterson’s, and his college dominator rating is the reason why analysts are excited to see him finally get his time in the sun. A light workload during his first four years suggests that he could be in for a breakout season. For discerning opinions on the matter check in here.
Clearly the biggest issue for Gerhart is the Jaguars overall offense. The quarterback situation is comical at best and we’ve already detailed how bad they were last year. But we’ve seen Jones-Drew repeatedly put up top fantasy numbers even while his offense repeatedly yielded opposite results. If you focused on wide receivers in the early rounds Gerhart is a perfect fourth round running back to balance your team.
Bishop Sankey is the other back that’s associated with both the preseason hype machine and a lousy team. The Titans’ offense looks to be much improved this year but that doesn’t necessarily translate to the running back position. There seems to be a three-headed monster attacking the run game in Tennessee and it may take a few weeks, or a few injuries, to clear up who is the best back to own. Sankey checks in as the most expensive investment with Shonn Greene falling all the way to the twilight rounds and Dexter McCluster falling to waivers.
Make no mistake about it, Sankey is the most talented of the group and figures to be the future of the Titans ground attack. As far as 2014 is concerned dropping a fourth round pick on an otherwise unproven talent is a risky proposition. But if his college performance translates to the pros we could see a dominant fantasy asset who will likely climb into the first round for years to come. I won’t blame anyone for risking a fourth while others throw darts at wide receivers.
Long story short, Gerhart and Sankey are two reasons to pass on the backs available in the third round.
Round 5
By the time the fifth round rolls around we’ll have a good picture of our league-mates’ strategies. From it we’ll be able to ascertain which position to focus on going forward as well as identify weaknesses on our own teams.
The ADP of the fifth round reflects how teams are structured with an even mix of wide receivers, tight ends and running backs. Here we’ll find Michael Floyd, DeSean Jackson, Trent Richardson, Chris Johnson and Ben Tate.
You can make a case for Richardson to have a bounce back year given his opportunity. But the Colts offensive line leaves plenty room for worry. The same can be said about Floyd. On paper he should be primed for a monster season. But his division isn’t exactly cozy for wide receivers and his quarterback situation does little alleviate our concerns. That said, Floyd represents the safest option of the group both from a talent and opportunity standpoint.
Tate and Johnson are intriguing options. I’m a little surprised that Johnson is still being drafted this high. That says a lot about his abilities and even more about our prehistoric psychological bias. As mere primates we’re often victims to our instincts. Johnson’s monster 2009 season set the tone for his career as we know it. Expecting that level of return was and is a defective thought process. But the worst Johnson has ever finished in PPR scoring is 13th. Only 14 running backs have scored more points within their first six years of service—two of them are still active (Peterson and Jones-Drew).
Player | Years | FPs | |
---|---|---|---|
1 | LaDainian Tomlinson | 2001--2006 | 1903.9 |
2 | Emmitt Smith | 1990--1995 | 1690.7 |
3 | Eric Dickerson | 1983--1988 | 1605.5 |
4 | Shaun Alexander | 2000--2005 | 1520.4 |
5 | Adrian Peterson | 2007--2012 | 1518.4 |
6 | Barry Sanders | 1989--1994 | 1453.4 |
7 | Walter Payton | 1975--1980 | 1437.7 |
8 | Marshall Faulk | 1994--1999 | 1433.3 |
9 | Thurman Thomas | 1988--1993 | 1410.4 |
10 | Edgerrin James | 1999--2004 | 1388.2 |
11 | Maurice Jones-Drew | 2006--2011 | 1363.7 |
12 | Clinton Portis | 2002--2007 | 1356.7 |
13 | Curtis Martin | 1995--2000 | 1349.6 |
14 | Marcus Allen | 1982--1987 | 1345.8 |
15 | Chris Johnson | 2008--2013 | 1344.2 |
That’s some fine company to share. However, we all know of Johnson’s tendencies to avoid contact and his inability to follow his blockers. But should his ADP slip even more we’ll find that sweet spot where talent and opportunity comes at a lesser expense.
Tate has preformed well in his role as a backup to Foster. Now expected to be a feature in Cleveland I’d like to see a little more security both in terms of injuries and snap count. Should Johnny Manziel win the starting gig I actually like Tate a bit more. A quarterback that’s proficient at running, whether designed or scrambled, tends to keep defenses in check. Tate’s ability to catch the ball meshes well with Manziel’s tendencies to run and shoot.
As things stand in their current forms, I’m more bullish on Johnson than Tate. The Jets have the makings of an unspectacular but efficient offense. Efficiency often translates to more snaps for running backs, which is great news for CJRyanK even if Chris Ivory sniffs the goal line a little better. And though I warn against putting too much stock in strength of schedule, there are plenty of green lights for the Jets ground game in 2014.
Benediction
We’ve learned that PPS trumps snaps per team. And while a bad offense doesn’t always suffocate good players, average draft picks don’t always reflect opportunity. For example, the Rams finally have some big receivers that should help open up defenses for Stacy, but I’m not investing a third round pick in hopes they can do so.
Meanwhile, we know the Jets will pound the ball and we know they invested in a big wide receiver to challenge the small cornerbacks in their division and elsewhere. Should Geno Smith realize his potential as dual-threat quarterback, and should Eric Decker keep defenses honest, Chris Johnson may rival his best season ever. Not in the sense that he’ll gain 2,000 yards, but keeping up with his perennial appearance as a top PPR option is better than it has been in a couple of years.
The lessons here are simple yet poignant: don’t fear good players on bad offenses. In fact, dial up your contrarian reflexes and be prepared to jump on few of these guys as their ADP fluctuates—even if it’s only a few draft spots. Cornering talent and opportunity will always be the best way to separate from the pack.