Boudewijn

James Conner 2020 Outlook

Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, ajs723 said:

So where's the line? Is Chris Carson injury prone? Is Elliott? Is Barkley? Is Aaron Jones? Kamara? Dalvin Cook? What guys aren't other than CMC? 

This idea that some guys "just seem to get injured more" is totally based on knee-jerk, gut emotion. 

I clearly illustrated the line in the last sentence of my post. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

I clearly illustrated the line in the last sentence of my post. 

That's a clear illustration in the same way that a kindergartner creates a clear illustration of his family.

Seriously, you can't just say that some injuries are bad luck while others are evidence of a guy being injury prone without explaining how the hell we're supposed to differentiate the two.

Dalvin Cook had countless soft tissue injuries, then he was fine last year. On the flip side Tevin Coleman stayed fairly healthy in Atlanta for years and then had several banged up seasons in a row. 

It's human nature to look for patterns where none exist. We all want to think we've figured out who is going to stay healthy, and who isn't. In reality, nobody has any idea.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, ajs723 said:

That's a clear illustration in the same way that a kindergartner creates a clear illustration of his family.

Seriously, you can't just say that some injuries are bad luck while others are evidence of a guy being injury prone without explaining how the hell we're supposed to differentiate the two.

Dalvin Cook had countless soft tissue injuries, then he was fine last year. On the flip side Tevin Coleman stayed fairly healthy in Atlanta for years and then had several banged up seasons in a row. 

It's human nature to look for patterns where none exist. We all want to think we've figured out who is going to stay healthy, and who isn't. In reality, nobody has any idea.

It’s hard to use injuries as justification to draft or not draft a RB because they are easily the most injured position. This is why a lot of us handcuff RBs and not any other positions.

When I draft RBs I expect them to miss one start due to bye week and 2-3 more due to injuries, which is why I typically draft at least 6 RBs. If my top picks play in all 16 games I’m excited but that is not the norm.

 

https://www.profootballlogic.com/articles/nfl-injury-rate-analysis/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly it's more of a gut feeling for me when I draft. I think players can be prone to injury in phases of their career and at times can shake it. Take Keenan for instant, he just seemed to constantly be missing time the first few years which he did obviously, I used to refer to him as an injury prone player but as of late his track record is pretty solid. 

I also think its buying into players and feeling burned. So I had conner the last 2 and in 2018 I loved it, production, everything was booming until playoffs and he let me down amongst a few other guys. But it's like ok that happens, come back next year and it wasn't as good but we rolling then he misses 6 games.  So right now I'm not clamoring for conner, I'd consider him in an injury prone phase. It doesnt mean 100% I'll avoid him but if hes sitting there in a draft to be picked I can't help but base some frustration on 2 years now of him really hurting my team when it counted, it is what it is 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ddam2013 said:

It’s hard to use injuries as justification to draft or not draft a RB because they are easily the most injured position. This is why a lot of us handcuff RBs and not any other positions.

When I draft RBs I expect them to miss one start due to bye week and 2-3 more due to injuries, which is why I typically draft at least 6 RBs. If my top picks play in all 16 games I’m excited but that is not the norm.

 

https://www.profootballlogic.com/articles/nfl-injury-rate-analysis/

Yup. Running backs get hurt all the time. If you get 12-14 games from a RB, you can't complain. If you get 15 or 16, you got really lucky. If a guy tears an ACL or breaks a bone or something, you got unlucky.  That's all there is to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coming from the old days of fantasy they're all injury prone ...it was such a luxury to grab guys like Tomlinson,  smith, Holmes, Alexander....these guys and their games played are insane. I loved it back then as you could grab a rb and the performance was incredible year in and year out . And then lookin back as a reminder is just insanity to see their carries and games played in their entirety 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Savatage79 said:

Honestly it's more of a gut feeling for me when I draft. I think players can be prone to injury in phases of their career and at times can shake it. Take Keenan for instant, he just seemed to constantly be missing time the first few years which he did obviously, I used to refer to him as an injury prone player but as of late his track record is pretty solid.

Which point are you making? This is a perfect example of why you SHOULDN'T trust your gut. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, ajs723 said:

Which point are you making? This is a perfect example of why you SHOULDN'T trust your gut. 

I'm not saying it cant change but it did help me for those few years when guys took Allen early and I passes given it seemed every strong hit took him out , but allen has now proved hes able to stay healthier out there the last few years

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Savatage79 said:

I'm not saying it cant change but it did help me for those few years when guys took Allen early and I passes given it seemed every strong hit took him out , but allen has now proved hes able to stay healthier out there the last few years

It seems like the people who faded Allen after his injuries are the ones who made the mistake. It's not like he got hurt 6 years in a row. He was mostly healthy his first two seasons. He missed half of 2015, then had a freak injury in '16 that cost him the whole season. That's the point where people started calling him soft and labeling him injury prone. In three seasons since then, he hasn't had a single notable injury.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, ajs723 said:

It seems like the people who faded Allen after his injuries are the ones who made the mistake. It's not like he got hurt 6 years in a row. He was mostly healthy his first two seasons. He missed half of 2015, then had a freak injury in '16 that cost him the whole season. That's the point where people started calling him soft and labeling him injury prone. In three seasons since then, he hasn't had a single notable injury.  

You're missing the point where I'm agreeing it can change and I wish I had allen in some of his recent years, the point still stands tho is that his first few years he was dinged up alot and was more prone to injury. 

But I still won leagues without allen in the seasons he was holding up, and sure it's a gamble but that's what fantasy is, sometimes I pass on those type and it favors me and sometimes it doesn't. But nothing you'll say will convince me of otherwise that some players are just more prone to injury either in phases of their career or in some cases their whole career. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Savatage79 said:

You're missing the point where I'm agreeing it can change and I wish I had allen in some of his recent years, the point still stands tho is that his first few years he was dinged up alot and was more prone to injury. 

But I still won leagues without allen in the seasons he was holding up, and sure it's a gamble but that's what fantasy is, sometimes I pass on those type and it favors me and sometimes it doesn't. But nothing you'll say will convince me of otherwise that some players are just more prone to injury either in phases of their career or in some cases their whole career. 

That may be true, but it doesn't matter because there's no way to know when a player is entering or exiting one of those "phases" until after the fact.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ajs723 said:

That may be true, but it doesn't matter because there's no way to know when a player is entering or exiting one of those "phases" until after the fact.

No you don't but that's why it's a gamble . But it isnt madness to maybe look at 2 players in the same ADP and maybe snag one that has a better overall health history if the sample sizes are large enough. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He seems like an auto draft for me in the 3rd right now.

The same reasons for taking him in the 1st last year are there this year.

PIT has shown that they like to use a bellcow, the RB1 for PIT has been a locked in RB1, and I don't see any serious threat to his workload on the team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Savatage79 said:

No you don't but that's why it's a gamble . But it isnt madness to maybe look at 2 players in the same ADP and maybe snag one that has a better overall health history if the sample sizes are large enough. 

 

That's fair. I just feel like Conner didn't get knocked down a spot or two. He got knocked down several rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, ajs723 said:

That's fair. I just feel like Conner didn't get knocked down a spot or two. He got knocked down several rounds.

Let's see where he ends up closer to when everyone is actually drafting. 

Come August, if the news out of camp is that he's looking good and feeling good, can see him climbing dramatically. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, fjthegrey said:

Let's see where he ends up closer to when everyone is actually drafting. 

Come August, if the news out of camp is that he's looking good and feeling good, can see him climbing dramatically. 

Yea, I could see that especially with Ben back. I think as I said above it all varies person to person, those who didnt have him those bum games are probably more optimistic to make the grab whereas others who had him might pass easier , that seems more like how it goes person to person 

Edit: my profile pic has been Conner for 2 years now so I'm def a fan, I just wish he'd get thru a full season.  But hopefully this year is the one

Edited by Savatage79

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/6/2020 at 9:17 PM, ajs723 said:

I mean, do you know how many current starting NFL RBs played 16 games last year? Did you guess 4? Because it's 4. But wait, it gets better. One of those 4 is Aaron Jones, who missed several games in 2018 and 2017. Another is Elliott, who has never played 16 games in any other season, and missed 6 games in 2017. The other two are Chubb, who has started 25 games in 2 seasons, and the incomparable CMC.

So, by your criteria, every RB in the NFL is injury prone except CMC, and maybe Chubb, but we have a pretty small sample with him.

Again, this should not be a factor when deciding who to draft. All of these guys get hurt. Draft talent. Conner has it in spades.

Not saying you're wrong, but Zeke has never missed a game due to injury.  In 2017 he was suspended, and in 2016 and 2018 he missed Week 17 because the Cowboys rested starters.  

Same with Nick Chubb - hasn't missed an NFL game due to injury in his 2 year career.  Granted only 2 years, but again he has never missed a game due to injury.

Aaron Jones and Fournette played all 16 as you mentioned, and both came into the season with injury prone labels.

Joe Mixon played all 16 last year.

Sony Michel played all 16 games.

Carlos Hyde played all 16 games.

David Montgomery played all 16 games.

Phillip Lindsay played all 16 games.

Miles Sanders played all 16 games.  I know he wasn't the full time starter, but played all 16 in a somewhat starter's role.

Ronald Jones played all 16 games.

Frank Gore played all 16 (if you consider him the starter)

Not sure where you found "only 4 starting RBs played all 16"

And then there's guys who played in 15 games - only missing one because of injury:

Derrick Henry

Leveon Bell

Todd Gurley

Adrian Peterson

Of course playing RB in the NFL will lead to injury naturally.  But you look at guys who consistently give you 14+ games per year, and then look at Conner.  In the last 2 seasons Conner has played 13 and 10 games.  He played 16 his rookie year, but only had 32 carries so nowhere near a starter's workload.  So while I agree, anyone can get injured at anytime, players like Conner, Cook, Carson, Freeman, etc. seem to give you a higher chance of getting injured.  

Could Conner follow behind Fournette and finally put together a full healthy season? Maybe.  Odds say not likely, but there's still some percentage chance that he does.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Fort4242 said:

Not saying you're wrong, but Zeke has never missed a game due to injury.  In 2017 he was suspended, and in 2016 and 2018 he missed Week 17 because the Cowboys rested starters.  

Same with Nick Chubb - hasn't missed an NFL game due to injury in his 2 year career.  Granted only 2 years, but again he has never missed a game due to injury.

Aaron Jones and Fournette played all 16 as you mentioned, and both came into the season with injury prone labels.

Joe Mixon played all 16 last year.

Sony Michel played all 16 games.

Carlos Hyde played all 16 games.

David Montgomery played all 16 games.

Phillip Lindsay played all 16 games.

Miles Sanders played all 16 games.  I know he wasn't the full time starter, but played all 16 in a somewhat starter's role.

Ronald Jones played all 16 games.

Frank Gore played all 16 (if you consider him the starter)

Not sure where you found "only 4 starting RBs played all 16"

And then there's guys who played in 15 games - only missing one because of injury:

Derrick Henry

Leveon Bell

Todd Gurley

Adrian Peterson

Of course playing RB in the NFL will lead to injury naturally.  But you look at guys who consistently give you 14+ games per year, and then look at Conner.  In the last 2 seasons Conner has played 13 and 10 games.  He played 16 his rookie year, but only had 32 carries so nowhere near a starter's workload.  So while I agree, anyone can get injured at anytime, players like Conner, Cook, Carson, Freeman, etc. seem to give you a higher chance of getting injured.  

Could Conner follow behind Fournette and finally put together a full healthy season? Maybe.  Odds say not likely, but there's still some percentage chance that he does.  

 

 

I was looking at games started. Mixon, Michel, Montgomery and the rest of those guys didn't start every game. Your point is well taken, but technically there are only 4 current starting NFL RBs that started 16 games last year. That number is a little bit misleadingly low, but it drives home the point that most starting NFL RBs aren't going to last 16 games. Most won't last 14 or 15. It's a position that leads to injuries constantly. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ajs723 said:

I was looking at games started. Mixon, Michel, Montgomery and the rest of those guys didn't start every game. Your point is well taken, but technically there are only 4 current starting NFL RBs that started 16 games last year. That number is a little bit misleadingly low, but it drives home the point that most starting NFL RBs aren't going to last 16 games. Most won't last 14 or 15. It's a position that leads to injuries constantly. 

It does but there are still some guys I feel can wade thru alot better and that's ok it's a tough as hell position, but some guys in the league just seem to miss more on a regular basis imo ,just as a loose observation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, ajs723 said:

I was looking at games started. Mixon, Michel, Montgomery and the rest of those guys didn't start every game. Your point is well taken, but technically there are only 4 current starting NFL RBs that started 16 games last year. That number is a little bit misleadingly low, but it drives home the point that most starting NFL RBs aren't going to last 16 games. Most won't last 14 or 15. It's a position that leads to injuries constantly. 

Sure - but I think that's just semantics.  For the first snap of the game Tarik Cohen was on the field, so technically he was the "starter" over Montgomery.  But all those RBs played in 16 games even if they weren't technically listed as the starter.  So I don't think your point really makes any sense.  You're trying to illustrate that it's extremely rare for an RB to last all 16 games, when in fact, I just provided a list of plenty of RBs that played all 16, and then a few more who played in 15. 

Why did you only look at games started?  And not take a look at the actual play of the game?

So sure, there might have only been 4 RBs who technically "started" 16 games, but that does not illustrate the point.  I don't care about my fantasy RB being the "starter" on game day.  I care if he plays and gives me points.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Fort4242 said:

Sure - but I think that's just semantics.  For the first snap of the game Tarik Cohen was on the field, so technically he was the "starter" over Montgomery.  But all those RBs played in 16 games even if they weren't technically listed as the starter.  So I don't think your point really makes any sense.  You're trying to illustrate that it's extremely rare for an RB to last all 16 games, when in fact, I just provided a list of plenty of RBs that played all 16, and then a few more who played in 15. 

Why did you only look at games started?  And not take a look at the actual play of the game?

So sure, there might have only been 4 RBs who technically "started" 16 games, but that does not illustrate the point.  I don't care about my fantasy RB being the "starter" on game day.  I care if he plays and gives me points.  

Yes. Stats without context can ALWAYS be interpreted to present the argument from your vantage point, versus the moral of the story. Like above poster said, if a back doesn't touch the ball to start the game, he doesn't get the "start" label, so in my mind, that statistic doesn't really hammer home anything. With RBs and injuries, I think everyone understands they get injured at a higher rate than majority of positions. Within this position group, there are guys that do get injured at higher rates (just like every other position group). Guys like Conner, Coleman, and Guice just are more prone to the injuries they've already sustained, plus future injuries. There are also numerous websites that can describe these injuries and give context to just how severe they were, and how it can effect their future performance. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Fort4242 said:

Sure - but I think that's just semantics.  For the first snap of the game Tarik Cohen was on the field, so technically he was the "starter" over Montgomery.  But all those RBs played in 16 games even if they weren't technically listed as the starter.  So I don't think your point really makes any sense.  You're trying to illustrate that it's extremely rare for an RB to last all 16 games, when in fact, I just provided a list of plenty of RBs that played all 16, and then a few more who played in 15. 

Why did you only look at games started?  And not take a look at the actual play of the game?

So sure, there might have only been 4 RBs who technically "started" 16 games, but that does not illustrate the point.  I don't care about my fantasy RB being the "starter" on game day.  I care if he plays and gives me points.  

 

You're counting games where Miles Sanders, Ronald Jones, Frank Gore, etc got less than 5 carries? Cool. I think you're missing the point of the poster...You even critiqued him for referring to "games started" rather than games played in. The poster was clearly referring to starting RBs so why are you including RBs outside of that?

But if that's the game we're playing, Brandon Bolden also played in 15 games last year lol. What's the point of counting a game where a RB got 4 touches? He wasn't referring to timeshare RBs who happened to be active in 15-16 games and got over 15 touches maybe 1-3 times over the course of the season.

Edited by ThreadKiller

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It’s not Conner’s chances of injury that scares me, it’s Roethlisberger. 
 

Ben has gotten beaten the f*** up and is now 38 coming off elbow surgery and 3 years past when he almost retired because he had taken such a beating. This offense was abominable without him. 
 

What if Ben plays 16 games but just falls off a cliff in terms of play?

 

Also we have yet to see what the offense with Roethlisberger will look like without A Brown and Todd Haley. Granted it was only a game and a half but it didn’t look so good vs the Pats and Seahawks. Not sure a year away and COVID-affected pre-season is going to help. 
 

Throw in Conner’s lack of a full season?

 

I’ve got a bad feeling about this.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ThreadKiller said:

 

You're counting games where Miles Sanders, Ronald Jones, Frank Gore, etc got less than 5 carries? Cool. I think you're missing the point of the poster...You even critiqued him for referring to "games started" rather than games played in. The poster was clearly referring to starting RBs so why are you including RBs outside of that?

But if that's the game we're playing, Brandon Bolden also played in 15 games last year lol. What's the point of counting a game where a RB got 4 touches? He wasn't referring to timeshare RBs who happened to be active in 15-16 games and got over 15 touches maybe 1-3 times over the course of the season.

Because using "games started" is a bad way to look at RBs who lasted a full season.

I just took the top 30 RBs from last season and looked at how many played in all 16. 

For what it's worth Miles Sanders averaged over 15 opportunities per game.   There was a stretch Weeks 6-8 where he only got 6, 9, and 6 touches, but every single other game he was 11 or higher.  So was he an every down horse like CMC? No but he was more than just some ancillary RB who got a few touches a game.  Like obviously I wouldn't include someone like Justice Hill.  A part time player who got a few touches each game.  Sanders was way more than that.

Sure if you want to discredit a guy like Ron Jones because he split time with Peyton Barber, I can see that.  Frank Gore was the last one on the list and wasn't even going to include him, so take him off if you like.  

My main objective was to say that using "games started" is a crappy way to evaluate a RB's durability.  Just because a guy wasn't the "starter" in a given week, does not mean he was injured or missed the game at all.  

But look at the players who got hurt last year and didn't play even 15 games - guys like Cook, Carson, Kerryon, Freeman, Conner, Damien Williams - the usual suspects who are hurt seemingly every season.  Kamara and Barkley were victims of the dreaded high ankle sprain which seems like a random injury.  I wouldn't consider Kamara or Barkley injury prone at all.  But those other guys who consistently get banged up and miss time year after year, seem injury prone to me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you guys are on Twitter, I highly recommend you follow @FBInuryDoc.  Has some great research and info about injuries and injury proneness.  He did a long thread about Carson Wentz and how Carson's injuries have been a random collection rather than recurring - similar to Keenen Allen when he started.

Here's an article he recently put together talking about RBs and being injury prone.  He used a system to analyze the RBs injury history, surgery history, type of injury, etc.  Then he categorized each RB into 3 categories - Green, Yellow, Red.  And then within each category, separated them further into tiers.

The RBs in the low red tier: Marlon Mack, James Conner, Kerryon Johnson, Dalvin Cook, Rashaad Penny, Todd Gurley

Not saying this is gospel but just shows even when a medical professional applies a methodical approach analyzing the injury history and types of injuries for RBs, James Conner still falls in the highest risk category.  

https://www.fantasypoints.com/nfl/articles/season/2020/injury-volatility-running-backs

You have to register on the site to access the article, but registration is free right now. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.