I want to learn about FF

[Ben Kenobi]

Btw, on topic, LT is officially scratched for Sunday:

Yeah, it unfortunate. Still debating whether I want to start Bennett or McGahee.

[Solomwi]

So if a player has more touches and more yardage, he isn't the 'starter'?

When did Ward do that? Not last year. Not Sunday.

Even in his 'breakout' year, he received more touches at the beginning of the season, and fewer as the season wore on. Why are you lecturing me on Sproles? Dude, I've been watching him for longer than you have.

Demonstrably false, on every account. I've been watching Sproles since he was in Manhattan, and Sproles had over half his carries and 2/3 of his catches come in the second half of the season, culminating in 16 touches, his highest total of the year, in week 17 against Denver. At this point, if I were you, I'd be claiming to have never watched a game, because it's clear you either have no understanding of what you're watching or feel no need to be honest about it.

And you miss the fact that Sproles' production tapered off towards the end of the season. I really don't know why this is a debate.

Because the only place that happened, especially in the passing game, is your fevered imagination.

LT had more yards in the passing game than Sproles had all year. Sproles is a nice complement to LT, but he's never shown he can be successful on a consistant basis when he's the 'feature back'.

Addressed already. Repetition does not increase truth.

1, most leagues don't count return yards.
2, I don't consider the fumble to be indicative of how LT will perform the rest of the season.

First, I wasn't counting return yards until you inserted the point about your league, which does. The point was that you tried to lean on the "LT did well enough to start last week" argument, and I was showing you why that's a non-starter.

You see, I have to figure out how people are going to do the rest of the season, not just put on hindsight 100 percent goggles.

And the latter is exactly what you did above.

Yes, but the million dollar question, is will he continue to do so?

If I knew, I'd be rich. What we can answer with much more certainty is whether he'll have the opportunity to do so. All signs point to yes.

Again, you misstate my argument. I exclude the fumble because I don't believe it will show up in future weeks, and I exclude the return yards, because they are not relevant to Jon's league. I do not exclude the TD, or the reception yards. WRT my league, it's a better question.

No, I didn't. You just don't understand your own argument. You said above you don't think Sproles gets the TD carry if LT's in, so that's something else you shouldn't expect to show up in future weeks. Why count it, but not the fumble? Besides, your point there was "LT and Sproles were about the same last week," to which your expectations for future weeks are completely irrelevant. On return yards, again, I NEVER COUNTED THEM, except to show the asininity of your "almost the same" argument once you let on that Sproles far outperformed LT in your league.

Barely over is not 25 points over. Goddamn. 4.25 is significantly better than 4 percent, especially on YPC.

Jesus ****ing Christ. No, it's not significantly better. Over 300 carries, 0.2 ypc is 60 more yards. Let's be more generous now that you've bumped 4.2 to 4.25. Over 300 carries, that's 75 more yards. Less than 5 yards a game. Let this one go. It's dumb, even by your standards.

Over Fred Jackson? I want some of what you are smoking. JM has plenty of backs, and they are all going to outscore sproles over the course of the season.

Which is it, Ben, lying or stupid? If it's stupid, go look back to the point where Jackson entered the discussion (hint: JM mentioned him long after we had branched off into me correcting your lies and misconceptions). It doesn't matter. Even in a fantasy football discussion, you couldn't help lying about things that are demonstrably false. Welcome back to ignore.

[-Jrabbit]

I feel sorry for Jon. He's probably checking back to see what further FF knowledge has been posted, and instead gets only a meaningless argument spread over a dozen or more posts.

I keep hoping that LT will come out in favor of gay marriage (or just come out ), just to see where Ben's loyalties really lie.

[Ben Kenobi]

Demonstrably false, on every account. I've been watching Sproles since he was in Manhattan,

Ok, now I finally understand why you are all over his jock. Look, I like Sproles. I think he's a great returner and he gives the chargers such an advantage in field position along with Scifres. I am uncertain whether or not he can carry the load for a full season with the Chargers as a feature back. I remain unconvinced. I haven't seen him in college, but I have seen all his games with the Bolts. I argued vehemently all season that the Chargers should not let him go under any circumstances.

Here's what you need to understand. You don't have to put down LT to build up Sproles. LT is one of the top 5 RBs ever in the history of the game, and the best that the Chargers have ever had. All I'm asking is that you drop the "LT has lost a step" drivel. Great, you are a Sproles fan, it would be nice if you started being a Chargers fan too.

and Sproles had over half his carries and 2/3 of his catches come in the second half of the season, culminating in 16 touches, his highest total of the year, in week 17 against Denver.

Not coincidentally, the game in which LT got hurt and left before the half.

At this point, if I were you, I'd be claiming to have never watched a game, because it's clear you either have no understanding of what you're watching or feel no need to be honest about it.

Oh come off it. Now, you just look like an ***. There's no need for it. Stop being a Sproles homer and lets both cheer him on tomorrow.

Because the only place that happened, especially in the passing game, is your fevered imagination.

What, that LT dominated Sproles in the passing game last season?

First, I wasn't counting return yards until you inserted the point about your league, which does. The point was that you tried to lean on the "LT did well enough to start last week" argument, and I was showing you why that's a non-starter.

Yes, LT did well enough to start. Sproles had an exceptional game, but that in no way takes away from LT's performance. This is what I'm trying to get you to acknowledge that LT, even when injured, beat out some players that were considered to be better than him.

If I knew, I'd be rich. What we can answer with much more certainty is whether he'll have the opportunity to do so. All signs point to yes.

All signs? WTF? Did LT get cut or something?

No, I didn't. You just don't understand your own argument. You said above you don't think Sproles gets the TD carry if LT's in, so that's something else you shouldn't expect to show up in future weeks.

That's true, but I was being generous to Sproles.

Why count it, but not the fumble?

LT fumbles, and loses about once every 3-4 years. Sproles scores about 5 TDs in a year. So Sproles is 20x as likely to score a TD as LT is to fumble.

Besides, your point there was "LT and Sproles were about the same last week," to which your expectations for future weeks are completely irrelevant.

The difference is about 10 yards, or one point. LT got far better numbers when carrying the rock, and Sproles made it up in the passing game. That is why I consider their performances to be roughly equal.

Sproles far outperformed LT in your league.

Yes he did. He also outperformed all but one of the starting backs taken in the first round. Are you saying that Sproles is a better pick than Maurice Jones-Drew?

Jesus ****ing Christ. No, it's not significantly better.

Yes, it is.

Over 300 carries, 0.2 ypc is 60 more yards. Let's be more generous now that you've bumped 4.2 to 4.25

It's 4.24 and change.

Over 300 carries, that's 75 more yards. Less than 5 yards a game. Let this one go. It's dumb, even by your standards.

He averages about 2 yards per carry more than sproles, which is very significant. I'm sorry, 2 ypc is just not good enough for a feature back.

[Ben Kenobi]

I keep hoping that LT will come out in favor of gay marriage (or just come out ), just to see where Ben's loyalties really lie

He voted against Prop 8, but for Obama.

[ColdWizard]

...a RB rebounding after age 30...

John Riggins.

[-Jrabbit]

He voted against Prop 8, but for Obama.

The fact that you know this is cause for concern. We may have to do an intervention.

[Solomwi]

John Riggins.

Fair enough, I'll give you Riggins. I don't think he helps Ben much, though. Jon, consider this another FF tidbit: don't trust any RB over 30.

[Solomwi]

I knew there was something I forgot to do. Thanks for the reminder, Ben. It's fixed now, but since I did see your post let me correct a few of your misconceptions. I'm not a KSU fan, a Sproles fan, an LT hater or a Chargers fan. I have no personal stake in the situation. I have immense frustration at your habit of making things up, blatantly lying about what I said, and just ignoring what you don't like.

Here's what you need to understand: "Sproles is a viable player in JM's format" and "LT has lost a step" are separate contentions, and the latter isn't an insult. Even if Sproles is hit by a bus tomorrow, LT has still lost a step, and it's obvious every time he takes the field. It's also not a knock on LT. He's at the age where RBs lose that step. It happened to Walter Payton around that time. Happened to Emmitt Smith. Happened to Shaun Alexander, Eric Dickerson, Jerome Bettis and Marshall Faulk about a year early. Edgerrin James, Curtis Martin, Tony Dorsett, Thurman Thomas and Franco Harris are a few other guys from the "all-time greats" list who it happened to at either 30 or 31. In fact, of the league's top 10 career rushers, the only two whose production didn't reflect the lost step at 29, 30 or 31 are Barry Sanders and Jim Brown, and neither of them played past 30.

Are you seriously still clinging to the 4 ypc thing? First, it's 4.2307, if you want to get that precise. Again, you fail. The point is that even 0.25 extra ypc only translates to 75 more yards over 300 carries, roughly a season's worth. That had nothing to do with LT's ypc vs. Sproles'. To put it another way, in Monday's game, it meant three more yards. That's it.

The answers to the rest can be found farther up in the thread, if you're honest enough to look for them.

[Ben Kenobi]

The fact that you know this is cause for concern. We may have to do an intervention.

He made public statements to the effect.

[Ben Kenobi]

Even if Sproles is hit by a bus tomorrow, LT has still lost a step, and it's obvious every time he takes the field.

I find it immensely frustrating that you would gage his career to be in permanent and total decline based on one game where he was injured halfway through.

It's also not a knock on LT. He's at the age where RBs lose that step.

Again this horse hockey is entirely overrated. It did not happen to Emmitt Smith. His 8th season was less productive than his 9th, 10th, and so on all the way until his last season.

Ok, lets go back. 29 year old Emmitt. Based on your argument here, he only racked slightly over a thousand yards in his 8th season. You would probably have written him off right then. "He's 29, at the age in which RBs inevitably decline." Horse hockey. You would have missed out on 5 productive years afterwards.

It happened to Walter Payton around that time.

1983* 29 CHI RB 34 16 16 314 1421
1984*+ 30 CHI RB 34 16 16 381 1684
1985*+ 31 CHI RB 34 16 16 324 1551
1986* 32 CHI RB 34 16 16 321 1333

8th year he had a bad season. He rebounded after the age of 30, and had his second best career year at the age of 30, the same age as which LT is now.

So go on, let's hear your rule, don't trust an RB after 30. Bull****!

[-Jrabbit]

I think it's fair to say that most RBs who get over 300 touches/year tend to decline after the age of 30. But it's a rule of thumb, not a law.

Trying to prove (or disprove) what is basically a guideline -- especially by quoting one or two specific exceptions -- is foolish on the face of it. Statistics are not football. Things like YPC and total yards are affected by a lot of other factors - injuries/age of the offensive line, coaching changes, etc.

[Ben Kenobi]

Oh, I understand the rule, but there's always exceptions, and it's not the case for any of the best backs.

[SlowwHand]

I just read an article just read, about football players and how they go broke. I knew the average length for a career was 3 years. They don't all blow it on dope. There are a LOT of stupid business start ups. Not just one, oh hell no, a few. I can't remember who they zoomed in on. What they make over three years, at worst, isn't bad at all.

[ColdWizard]

I think it's fair to say that most RBs who get over 300 touches/year tend to decline after the age of 30. But it's a rule of thumb, not a law.

Trying to prove (or disprove) what is basically a guideline -- especially by quoting one or two specific exceptions -- is foolish on the face of it. Statistics are not football. Things like YPC and total yards are affected by a lot of other factors - injuries/age of the offensive line, coaching changes, etc.

Statistics are Fantasy Football. And it is a law that backs decline after 30. Name me two 40 year old running backs in NFL history.

I will agree that the 30 line seems rather arbitrary, but not many of the top single seasons were put up by those older than 30.

You would have missed out on 5 productive years afterwards.

No, he would have been trying to draft Eddie George, Marshall Faulk, and LT instead and gotten more production out of younger backs.

Also, Payton's "bad eighth season", that was a strike shortened season