Join the Footballguys Daily Update
Start your morning with our roundup of the most important stories in football - with the fantasy insight you need to make league-winning decisions. Delivered straight to your inbox, 100% free.
The past few weeks have been lengthy endeavors talking about the 2013 season and the upcoming 'new reality', but this week will incorporate more data and the method to my dynasty madness. When comparing my rankings to most out there, mine look like a high-risk, high-reward endeavor that is heavily slanted towards youth. In this addition, I will outline the method to my running back madness that has David Wilson squarely at no.2 and Christine Michael and Giovani Bernard in the top-12. All three are ranked over many ‘established’ names with productive seasons in the recent past. The key word there is ‘past’ as fantasy owners, especially dynasty folks, do not get points, head-to-head victories, or championship banners for production in prior seasons.
The past is in the past
Football, like hockey, has quite a few chaotic events that combine to form a game, season, and ultimately a career. Fantasy baseball and basketball owners have the luxury of far more predictive advanced metrics and an overwhelming sample size compared to us fantasy footballers. More than any other position, I think what happened last year is overvalued into the equation of what happens next with running backs. It is a volatile position where a lingering injury or two can put a starter out of work not just with their current team, but struggling to find work in the NFL. What a running back did a couple years has no bearing to how the next couple turn out.
The Data
Continuing with the line of thinking that production in the past is gone, I use an age chart that looks at the historical average of production lost by each age year of a running back. I include only running backs that have eclipsed 12 points-per-game in a season with PPR scoring or had at least 1,000 rushing yards in a season. The reason is age decline does not matter when talking about unproductive players. No one is wondering about the career arc for Justin Forsett or Jason Snelling right now. They have not been fantasy starters for any real stretch of their respective careers. My research goes back to running backs with a qualifying season starting back in 1990, nearly 150 players. On to the results and one aspect of my dynasty rankings:
| Age | % Remaining | Age | % Remaining |
| 21 | 100 | 28 | 20 |
| 22 | 100 | 29 | 14 |
| 23 | 95 | 30 | 8 |
| 24 | 81 | 31 | 4 |
| 25 | 66 | 32 | 2 |
| 26 | 51 | 33 | 1 |
| 27 | 36 | 34 | 0 |
A few things to keep in mind with this table: So a 25-year-old this year, LeSean McCoy or DeMarco Murray for example, on average has 66% of their production above that 12 PPG baseline still left in the tank. On the flip side, a 28-year-old back like Chris Johnson or Maurice Jones-Drew has historically burned through 80% of their career production by now. Like all historical comparisons, it is not an end-all, be-all equation, but it serves as a general guide that I like to use as a starting point. It takes a strong case to value a player outside of these parameters.
Moving Forward
Just like with most historical trends and career arc studies, this can create just as many new questions as answers to prior ones. For example, would a dynasty owner rather have the projected 20% of career production left in Chris Johnson’s career or 100% of 22-year-old Eddie Lacy’s? The biggest variable there is we have no data on the Packers rookie of what a ‘typical’ season may be in his peak age range. With all young players there will be a divide between those that need to see it first before projecting a player above older veterans and those who take on that perceived ‘risk’ coupled with the payoff of longevity and ascending market value.
I firmly stand on the side of targeting talented young backs and banking on that select group more than catching a falling knife in the last quality season or two from an aging veteran. The risk factor of completely busting is often built in to the acquisition price of rookies and backs that have yet to fully breakout production-wise. Think about Giovani Bernard this year. His cost is usually a top-3 pick in rookie drafts or third-to-fourth round startup selection of late. If folks knew he was the second coming of Lesean McCoy, a 21-year-old version, would that be his cost? Of course not. The cost of a young running back horse in dynasty is through the roof. They fly up startup draft boards the moment they have a stable starting job or a string of production behind him. If Bernard was assured to be the next McCoy, he was easily be a first round startup pick. An owner would be getting his entire career of production and it starts at the young age of 21, unlike some of the older rookies like Doug Martin last year.
Valuing one season over another
Relating to this subject of age decline and built-in risk with young running backs is the common dynasty philosophy that this year is more important and valuable than the next. I hear all the time folks saying “I am all in for this season’s championship run” or “I am rebuilding with a target of 2015 to be a contender”. I could write an entire article on mindsets like that alone. Selling out for the current season usually revolves around a core of older players, or as I like to refer to them on the Under the Helmet podcast, declining assets. That defeats the purpose of a dynasty team. The essence of a dynasty team is to reload every single season, infusing the back-end of a roster with youth that becomes the starters of tomorrow. On the other side, some teams are building for so far out in the future they forgo actually competing with a younger roster in the next year or two in favor of trading them for younger options that need some seasoning before becoming consistent contributors.
A Real World Example
These approaches to the dynasty format are put to the test when faced with startup decisions like ‘how do I order David Wilson, Marshawn Lynch, Alfred Morris, and Matt Forte in the second round range?’ Going by the above age curve, Wilson has his entire career of production ahead him, Morris a robust 81%, and the duo of Lynch and Forte still at 36% with their 27-year-old campaigns on deck in 2013. Looking at it from that perspective, it is difficult for me to understand the decision to select Lynch or Forte from that group. With two-thirds of their production on average already in the rear-view mirror, they had better produce a title or two in the coming two years because their market value is already hurting and their peak is likely well past them. To select either of them ahead of Wilson when valuing every season equaling is essentially saying ‘I am scared to death that Wilson is a complete bust.’ That perceived ‘safe’ play selecting Forte in the second round is actually a big risk from my perspective. The next two seasons, after which 86% of Forte’s production on average will be gone, will be completely pressurized to win a title. That selection of a 27-year-old back early in a startup will cascade into other short-term band-aid moves like trading away rookie picks and acquiring fellow declining assets to slightly improve the team’s short-term title chances. It is a very slippery slope that begins with a single decision like saying ‘with my second round pick of this startup draft, I select Matt Forte.’
Building a Foundation
This is not meant to be an anti-Matt Forte argument or anything like that. These players are commodities and in dynasty, they are the building blocks of a corporation. Building a team from the ground up with an aging running back can be visually represented by cracks in the foundation for a building. It may hold up for a little bit, but eventually nature will take its course. Like the quote from Shankshank Redemption “it takes pressure and time.” Older running backs will crack, just like that questionable building foundation, and it will come back to haunt a dynasty team that invested their startup capital in a player closer to the end than the beginning.
