Between 2001 and 2002, Kansas City Chiefs' running back Priest Holmes rushed for 3,170 yards and 29 touchdowns. In two short years after coming from Baltimore, Holmes had established himself as one of the premiere running backs in the NFL, as well as putting together two of the greatest rushing seasons ever for a Kansas City Chief.
With three games left in the 2002 season, the Chiefs traveled to Mile High stadium to play the Denver Broncos in a game they eventually lost by a touchdown. After breaking off a 56-yard run in the third quarter, Priest Holmes was dragged down by Denver defenders and left the game with a bruised right hip. Holmes didn't finish the rest of the season and after a stellar 2003 season, only played in 19 games over the next four years because of injuries.
After the 2002 season, which ended with Holmes nearly being placed on injured reserve, the Chiefs' first move in the 2003 draft was to draft Penn St. running back Larry Johnson with the 27th overall pick.
At the time, it was deemed a curious pick by the experts. Priest Holmes had just had two of the greatest rushing seasons in franchise history and there were plenty of arguments that improving a swiss cheese defense should have been priority #1, considering the squad ended 2002 ranked last in total defense, second to last in pass defense and 24th overall in rush defense.
Thankfully, and this is a rarity out of the Dick Vermeil coaching years in the draft, the Chiefs knew what they were doing (or got lucky). As I mentioned before, Priest Holmes' skills quickly eroded after a number of serious injuries and Larry Johnson was able to fill in and absolutely dominated. 50 touchdowns and two seasons of over 1,750 yards rushing later and the LJ pick is no longer questioned.
Currently, the Chiefs find themselves in a similar position as 2003. They have a Pro Bowl running back coming off a severe injury, the nature of which could affect the rest of Larry Johnson's career. The Chiefs also drafted a running back when many thought they would focus on other positions. Drafting Jamaal Charles in the third round gave me a similar feeling as when LJ was drafted - Interesting but didn't we have bigger needs?
I slept on it. I talked with people here. I became much, much comfortable with this pick. In fact, a few days removed from the draft, I'll contend this was the best pick the Chiefs could have made at the time.
The Chiefs' running back situation in 2007 did not end well. The team was performing emergency surgery at the end of 2007 - trying to keep enough parts working together just to barely function. Without Larry Johnson in the lineup, the Chiefs' lack of depth was exposed. Doesn't the idea of Jackie Battle playing in the NFL sound a bit ridiculous now?
Perhaps not the "third down" back he's being billed as (although he'll play that role with the Chiefs for now), Jamaal Charles showed the ability to shoulder a large workload late in his college career. Charles finished his 2007 season with 258 carries and 1,619 yards.
Jamaal Charles may not be ready to be a 20-25 carry a game running back but he doesn't have to be right now. He'll compliment Larry Johnson quite well and I predict he jumps Kolby Smith on the depth chart rather quickly.
But like Larry Johnson was to Priest Holmes, don't be surprised if Charles gets the opportunity to start and picks up where LJ left off. He has the talent to do just that.
As fickle as the running back position can be in the NFL, and this is a cliche, but you really can't have too many good ones. Picking Jamaal Charles in the third round of the 2008 draft may turn out to be a franchise saver, just like Larry Johnson turned out be.
1 recs | 36 comments
Great points as usual, Chris.
As the draft drifts farther into the past, I’m finding myself becoming much more comfortable with the picks the Chiefs made overall. It may be that it’s sinking in that they never reached and took the best players they could in every round, or it may be the fact that they’re still getting guys into rookie minicamp this weekend to see what they’ve got.
Either way, I’m definitely happy with their first 4 picks. Charles seems like he could be a throw-back to what the Chiefs had in Priest Holmes, and that’s pretty darn exciting.
IISaiNtII - May 1, 2008
Jamaal Charles
Was an absolute steal in the third round. For all my gripes about the second day of the draft, I thought that his selection was a brilliant move. And yes, barring injuries or unforeseen setbacks, I think he’ll be our primary back within the next couple of years.
UCrawford - May 1, 2008
Severe?
I think it was a great and smart pick, but come on, LJ’s injury wasn’t severe and I don’t think it will affect him anymore. It was a broken bone that he didn’t know was broken and he kept trying to come back and play on. Don’t get me wrong, everything else written was great. That part just stuck to me i guess.
Dustin SLO,CA - May 1, 2008
LJ
His age combined with his running style and the amount of usage he’s received are more what I’m thinking will make Charles our eventual primary. In two years, Johnson will be 30, which is a bad age for running backs generally (and which is especially bad for the team when that running back makes a superstar salary). It would be a nasty cap hit to trade or dump Johnson, so I figure in a couple of years he’ll be gradually phased out in favor of Charles and once his cap penalty number gets down to an amount we can handle, he’ll get traded or (more likely) waived.
I recognize that Larry Johnson is a talented running back, but I think that Charles’ drafting is a sign that he’ll be headed for “complementary back” status in a couple of years.
UCrawford - May 1, 2008
a’la willie parker/jerome bettis.
with a Chan Gailey offense, I think Charles/Johnson duo is about 99.9% likely. Much like they had when they won the Superbowl. Parker was the “feature” back, while Bettis came in to run people down.
IISaiNtII - May 1, 2008
I Agree
I think you’ll see a noticeable split between Johnson and Charles this year. It’ll be nice to have a competent offensive coordinator in charge this year as well. That might alleviate some of the problems on the offensive line at least a little (which Solari clearly wasn’t able to do).
UCrawford - May 1, 2008
LJ
Age means nothing to me, plenty of examples in the world to prove that. Running style, that has validity. Though the defense seems to get hit harder than he does AND I’ve noticed LJ get shoestring tackled more than anyone else that i’ve watched run (opinion obviously). I agree that eventually he will get phased out, it happens, I’m just tired of hearing so often that LJ’s old and washed up because of all of his carries and he’s almost 30 and his running style, why did we spend soooo much money on a 28y/o running back…. First, he deserves that money. He carried the Chiefs and us fans on his back for 3yrs now. Also, I don’t believe he really has worn too much of the tread on his tires.
LJ: touches- 1177, carries- 1050, college- 417 over 3 yrs, 29y/o,
(5 seasons)(...3.5…)LT: 2823, 2365, ?, 29y/o
Ricky Williams (for perspective b/c we all know how often he has been on the field…):
2,009, 1763, ?, 31y/o
Clinton Portis: 1915, 1710, 297 (1yr), 27 y/o
Earl Campbell (aka retro LJ) 2308, 2187, ?, @ 30y/o (9sea)
Walter Payton: 4347, 3838, ?, 33y/o (13sea)
Barry Sanders: 3419, 3062, 30y/o (10 sea)
The Way I see it, LJ is only halfway there. And his injury was probably a blessing and came on a good year for him to sit out half the season. Which he was still on pace for @ least 1200 yds rushing. I am in no way coming after you, UCrawford, just venting some frustration because of how often I hear LJ bashing (not saying you are). I think he has another 3yrs of dominance. Minimum.
Dustin SLO,CA - May 1, 2008
Sorry, But Age Matters For Running Backs Like LJ
Christian Okoye, Terrell Davis, Earl Campbell, Neal Anderson…all people with styles comparable to Larry Johnson, all of whom were done as full-time backs or out of the league by the time they hit 30. They suddenly dropped off a cliff because the wear and tear on their bodies caught up to them. Earl Campbell had the longest career of all of them and he was done as a full-time back after six seasons, didn’t perform at an All-Pro level after the first three, and was out of the league at 30. If the Chiefs split carries between Johnson and Charles I think that LJ may string his career out longer (like Fred Taylor has done in Jacksonville) but I don’t know that he’ll want that role and his contract (assuming we have a salary cap in two years) will cause a problem for us given his contribution to the team as a complementary back.
As for your comments, don’t worry, I didn’t take them personally (nor are mine intended to be personal towards you). And I’ll admit that I bash on LJ a lot…I think he’s overpaid for what he’s going to likely produce, I think his effort is inconsistent and his attitude sucks, and I think he’ll end up being a problem in the locker room before long. I appreciate the results he’s put up in the past, but I think that represented a high-water mark for him and given the circumstances I would have preferred that the Chiefs deal him last year when he was cheap and someone might have given up good value for him (you can always find serviceable running backs) in exchange for his cheap contract. I’m okay with him being around for now, given that he’s basically untradeable, so long as he doesn’t become a problem child…I just think that if/when the Chiefs are competitive again, Larry Johnson’s probably going to be too old and broken to be a big piece of that.
UCrawford - May 1, 2008
LJ did have one benefit
that Okoye, Campbell, et. al. didn’t have…namely, Vermeil sitting him on the bench and calling him a baby…LJ really wasn’t featured for 4 years in college, and saw minimal action in his first few years as a Chief…it will be interesting to see how well he ages. (Marcus Allen was old as hell when he played for us too, but because Davis benched him for what, 2 years?, he still had some gas in the tank)
PVChiefsfan - May 1, 2008
Marcus Allen
...was more of a finesse runner. He didn’t try to take out defensive players…he was more elusive so he could avoid taking direct shots. Same with Barry Sanders. He was big enough to be a power back, but he lasted longer by not getting nailed all the time (even though he had an abysmal line). And Marcus Allen also never got 1,000 yards for us (nor did he get more than 207 carries per season in his time here). He was a complementary back who was often used for short-yardage runs (because he was great at slipping through holes).
UCrawford - May 1, 2008
In Fact...
Marcus Allen only had one season (1985) where he topped 300 carries and never got more than 223 carries (or broke 1,000 yards) in any season after that. Besides being an elusive runner a large part of the reason he lasted so long as because he was a complementary back from age 26 on. If the Chiefs make Johnson a complementary back from now on he’ll probably last past 30, but his contract will definitely be a liability (and possibly so will his attitude).
UCrawford - May 1, 2008
LJ
All of those guys ( – TD) also didn’t have modern medicine/technology/nutrition/knowledge/care that modern athletes now benefit from that will keep them playing past 30. And like the point I made earlier, LJ has not had the wear and tare that other elite running backs currently and in the past have had. Earl Campbell after 5 seasons carried the ball 1883 times and started 90/99 games. LJ in 5 seasons = 1050 and started 36 of 56 games played. Just in the NFL. LJ is a MUCH younger 29 y/o.
As for his attitude. None of us are in that locker room so none have a leg to stand on. But, NONE of us have EVER heard anyone complain about him in the locker room. As far as attitude on the field, different strokes. I happen to love his attitude. Hard nose and all heart. I love that he plays with emotion and that giant chip AND I can’t stand when people say he doesn’t give a F*#. Again, he is ALL HEART. Some people view him different and some see him as I do (i like to call us the smart un-jaded ones : ) ) . Also, we all know CP is a stingy bastard, if he’s willing to put up that kind of $ to a RB, do you really think he is a cancer and doesn’t give his 110? Every time I hear someone question LJ’s heart, I litterally see that KC flag stuck in the ground and 2 Packers laying on their asses.
Especially with this future 2 back monster in KC….LJ ‘til 2012! Then he will be our situational guy.
Dustin SLO,CA - May 1, 2008
Player Era
Oh come on now…that’s a load of crap. Those guys had the same level of medicine/nutrition/technology/knowledge/care as the guys they were playing against. Careers are about the same length as they’ve always been. In fact, you could make the argument that players are more likely to get hurt now thanks to the increased size and speed of players on the field. And you’re talking about a timeframe of about 20 years here…not 100 years like in baseball (hell, Terrell Davis played 10 years ago). If you want to argue this point, a better argument is to find running backs with comparable styles to LJ who were primary backs putting up star numbers past the age of 30 or 31. From what I’ve found through a cursory search, there haven’t been any…Eddie George and John Riggins were probably the best comparisons, and they both drastically declined in performance at age 30. If you can find some who maintained their pre-30s level of performance into their 30s, I’ll be happy to reconsider my position.
1) You will rarely hear a player through a teammate under the bus for being a locker room cancer…and you will almost never hear them do it to the star player on the team. But then, I’m not talking about the locker room, because all I care about is on-the-field performance.
2) Larry Johnson is a money player. His heart and emotion are clearly evident when he’s running for yards or catching passes because those are the things that get him a big contract (and probably trigger incentives) and make him look good. When he’s got to pass block, he doesn’t give a damn (even if it means the QB gets his head taken off, like Damon Huard did a couple of times when LJ outright refused to even try to block a pass-rusher). He likes to put out an effort at the things that make him personally look good and he doesn’t care about the things that don’t, even if they’re an important part of his job. He’s been this way since his career started (that’s why Vermeil wouldn’t play him) and he hasn’t changed since. Contrast that with LT2, who hasn’t got the size of LJ but always puts out an effort at pass-blocking (even though it doesn’t earn him money)...that’s a player with heart. I also don’t think it’s a coincidence that his teams have been better than our teams and why he’s more highly regarded than LJ.
3) As for LJ’s contract, I’ve never called Johnson greedy for wanting a big contract, nor have I vilified him for holding out. It made sense, given his small contract and age, to hold out last year because that was likely his last chance to get a big deal. He was smart to do it and I don’t fault him for that. I just think it was stupid of Carl Peterson to give him the deal he did because of all the reasons I listed earlier…at point was the ideal time to trade him.
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
Are You Kidding?
first, i said except TD because he is the most recent (He did suffer from chronic migraines though, remember?) Do you have any idea how much has changed in 10, 20, and 30+ years in medicine/nutrition/technology/knowledge/care, especially preventative and being able to learn from the aforementioned players? I’ve been working as a firefighter/EMT for 5 years and studying to be a medic, I can’t begin to tell you how much has changed in FIVE years. A little off topic, i know, but it is not crap.
(I don’t know how to do the citing things you guys do) : )
Oh come on now…that’s a load of crap. Those guys had the same level of medicine/nutrition/technology/knowledge/care as the guys they were playing against.
Also, LJ comes from an entire family of elite athletes, where he actually admits to not being the best in his family. I’m pretty sure he has taking all the right preventive actions for longevity.
I get your point about not performing past 30, but like I mentioned before, I don’t by that. It’s purely subjective.
by the way
E. Smith
30, 3243carries, retired35W. Payton
30, 3047car, ret33F. Harris
30, 2220 car, ret34J. Brown
29, 2359 car, ret29LJ @ 28 (he’s turning 29 btw), 1050
I can keep going. The point is, LJ at 30 (unless he gets 500+ carries/yr) will be nowhere near the same number. Especially w/ Charles coming in now.
I feel like comparing LJ to LT will just get us into an even longer discussion. When this one’s done, i’ll be down. But I don’t want to sit in front of a computer that long to keep up both.
Dustin SLO,CA - May 2, 2008
Don’t know what happened…
ES- at 30y/o, 3243 carries, retired at 35
WP- 30, 3047car, ret 33
FH- 30, 2220, ret 34
JB- 29, 2359, ret 29
Dustin SLO,CA - May 2, 2008
Respectfully, You're Missing My Point
I didn’t say that none of those guys were in the league past 30 or 31…I said that none of those guys were performing at a level high enough to justify a star contract.
Emmitt Smith never averaged 4 ypc (which should be the standard for quality production) or 300 carries in any season after age 31. Franco Harris’ last season at a high level of production was 31 (and he avoided contact whenever possible). Jim Brown may or may not have lasted longer, but we’ll never know because he retired at 29 at the top of his game (so he’s not really relevant to this discussion). Walter Payton is the only guy on that list who was a highly productive feature back past the age of 31 and he was a finesse running back (unlike LJ)...and he seems to be the only one who pulled that off. I can’t find any other RB who had a season where they pulled down 300+ carries and averaged 4 ypc in any season after age 31. The only ones who manage to survive past that age and stay productive are those who become complementary backs (which would make LJ’s contract pretty horrible if he’s got three years remaining during a period where most running backs are done.
Now, maybe LJ will prove everybody wrong and last longer…maybe he’ll be a feature back until he’s 35 or 40. And maybe Zack Grienke will win 511 games in the majors like Cy Young and get more strikeouts than Nolan Ryan. Nobody knows the future, after all…but I’m certainly not hopeful that either LJ or Grienke will do that well. Making projections about the future is about weighing the odds, and for LJ the odds say that it’s extremely unlikely that he’ll be a feature back for more than another year or two, regardless of how good an athlete he is (which means he’ll be pretty much useless to us when we’re competitive again). And Carl Peterson should have taken that into account and considered trading LJ before he panicked and handed him that contract.
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
For the citation thing...
You can do it by typing the word (blockquote) and (/blockquote) in front of and behind whatever excerpt you’re trying to highlight. Instead of the parentheses, though, use these symbols < >
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
I get it
I completely understand what you are saying. That’s why I’ve been showing the carries of everybody in comparison to LJ. I don’t think you’re coming out right field or anything, you make sense. I’ve been trying to say that LJ is not the same case. And his superstar contract is up in 2012, when he will turn 33 that November. That sounds logical to me. He’ll probably retire. If he doesn’t, he knows he won’t make the same money, that’s why he held out. No, running backs have not carried the ball 300+ times late in their career. They also didn’t just go out to pasture either.
.................................caries….avg/yr…..y/c…....career car/avg….......career max
E. Smith…30-35….1405…...281…......3.9…......19.5/g….....................24.5
W.Payton..30-33…1172…...293…......4.3….......20.2…........................24.2
C.Martin..30-32…..914….....304…......3.97….....20.9….........................24.6
J.Bettis…30-33…...791….....198.2…...3.5…........18.1…........................25
F. Harris..30-33…..896….....217.3…..3.9….........17…...........................21.4
T.Dorsett.30-34…..1102…..220.4…..3.9….........17…............................21.4
In case it doesn’t make sense: I took their #carries, average per season, yards per carry (all after age 30), their career carries per game and the most carries they ever had per game in a season. And those were just the first 6 guys I looked into. I think they were pretty productive. I didn’t compare running style, i know.
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/leaders/rush_att_career.htm
I get what you are saying. I guess I’m just optimistic about what LJ will bring to us in the next 4 years. I think it will be worth what King Carl paid for.
P.S. 3.9 is pretty damn close to 4 i think.
Dustin SLO,CA - May 2, 2008
Stat Average Problem
Dustin,
You’re tossing in three year periods that are masking the decline after 31. Curtis Martin’s age 32 year (220 carries, 3.3 ypc) was terrible. Emmitt Smith’s age 32 and 33 years were extremely mediocre (good carry numbers with 261 & 254, but bad production with 3.9 & 3.8 ypc respectively) after which he dropped right off the cliff. Franco Harris’ age 32 year saw him miss seven games (and get only 140 carries) and his age 33 year saw his ypc plummet. Dorsett was a complementary back from age 32 on (and only a good one at 32). And Jerome Bettis was terrible from age 30 on and should never have been given the number of carries he got.
I understand what you’re saying about 3.9 ypc being close to 4.0 ypc, and yes, the cutoff is a bit arbitrary but I look at it as 4.0 ypc being the minimum average that is acceptable for a primary back…or pretty much anyone who gets substantial playing time. Frankly, 4.0 is probably a bit low, since most reserves need to average at least 4 to even be considered for a starting job or to avoid getting cut., so whenever I see a team giving a lot of carries to someone falling below that line it usually means that team has major problems. From what I can see the reason that most teams stick with veterans who fall below that is that either the coach plays favorites (which accounts for Eddie George’s career), they’ve got nobody on the bench who can do better (the Steelers’ problem), or the contract is too prohibitive for the team to dump them (which I think is what will happen with LJ). Like I said, I’d be happy if LJ was able to beat the odds and stayed a starting back for 5 more years (assuming he keeps his attitude straight)...but I don’t think it’s going to happen, and the odds are that the time in which he’s done will mean a major cap hit for us. Hopefully, we’ll still be well under the cap when that happens and won’t need to make quality roster cuts to compensate. Time will tell, though.
UCrawford - May 4, 2008
Another one or two for your list
What about John Riggins (12 seasons) and Franco Harris (13 seasons)? You can’t tell me they didn’t run people over on a weekly basis. They never had a season where they carried as many times as LJ, but they were certainly the “work horse” of their teams until later in their careers.
I’m not saying LJ will have a 12 season career… I just wanted to point out that bruisers aren’t always cut short due to wear.
I love the Jamaal Charles pick. I think he’s a perfect spell for LJ. He can probably catch and block better than LJ (who doesn’t?), so maybe he’ll see some action as a 3rd down back.
I’m excited for mini camp tomorrow.
Ochophosphate - May 1, 2008
Riggins And Harris
Riggins didn’t crack 4 yards per carry in any season after age 30, while playing behind the best line in pro football (the Hogs). Franco Harris’s level of performance lasted a little longer because he avoided contact whenever possible by running out of bounds instead of going for the extra yard (something he was well-known for) and because the team cut his carries. He had a decent season at age 31, he missed 7 games at age 32, he had a really mediocre season at age 33 (leading to the Steelers getting rid of him), and he was done after 8 games with the Seahawks the next year. In only one of those seasons after age 31 did he break 150 carries.
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
Franco and John
Franco = 2949 career
Riggins= 2916 career
Dustin SLO,CA - May 1, 2008
I really wanted the Bears to draft Charles.
I thought a draft of Chris Williams, Brian Brohm, Jamaal Charles and Andre Caldwell (along with picking up whatever RB Oakland decided to drop) would have been awesome for the Bears. I think Charles will be an incredible complement back. A complete back? There’s a lot to be desired there, but he has the athleticism, which is the hardest thing to get.
tyger1147 - May 1, 2008
If everything goes according to plan..... (wringing hands together)
So really, LJ is going to be productive, age wise, for another 4 years (31-32)? He should be able to stand up to 300-350 or so carries a season for 4 years. He’d have around 2,500 career carries by then.
He’ll be Shaun Alexander after that. phheeeeeeyyyoooooommppp <-sound of skills rapidly deteriorating
So Jamaal comes in and starts by spelling LJ and getting used to playing in the NFL. Then when Larry fizzles, Jamaal will be 25-26 and ready to step in as a primary back. Of course, this is assuming he doesn’t get injured.
Some of the video I’ve seen of him is pretty ill. He can make some very quick cuts, and he’s fast like the lightning.
Ochophosphate - May 2, 2008
Not Likely
Out of the running backs we named who were comparable to LJ, only one got 300 carries in any season after age 30…John Riggins (who did it twice). He played behind the best offensive line in pro football at the time, and he averaged under 4 yards per carry.
Now, LJ may very well turn out to be the next John Riggins, considering the lack of wear and tear earlier in his career, but the odds simply don’t favor it. The odds favor him getting maybe two more years at his current levels of production (if he’s lucky and if the foot injury isn’t more serious than originally thought) then becoming a complementary back after that…for which he’ll be drastically overpaid.
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
there are two different thoughts being used
for the same argument. I think this is a GREAT discussion, because of the importance of a primary running back period, plus the money tied up in who happens to be our primary running back right now. I’d like this conversation to continue, but not in the circular fashion it’s been going.
The three variables that I see:
1. Age in calendar years. That’s what UCraw keeps citing, and backing up w/ stats. I love it.
2. Number of total carries. A couple other guys have been using this as the litmus test for when a back starts to decline. I think there is real value to equating total carries w/ odds of a back starting to decline.
3. Style of running. Spread out over a game or a season, LJ takes more of a pounding per carry than a more elusive back who shies away from contact.
I don’t have the personal desire to look up the stats, but I love sitting back and seeing what other people have put together to back their arguments. That’s what is so awesome about this site, and why I love it so much. A couple points I’d like to make, and hopefully there will be further discussion:
1. Age in calendar years tends to go hand-in-hand with total number of carries, because the older a back is, the more carries he tends to have had, as the years progress. However, I don’t think anyone can make the argument that (for illustrative purposes only) an RB who is 30 and has carried the ball 500 times total (regardless of style, taking only 500 hits plus however many tackles he’s broken), has suffered the same bodily wear-and-tear that an RB who is 30 and has had 1,000 carries (twice as many hits). So, calendar years is not the absolute. However,
2. Number of carries is not the absolute either. A RB w/ 500 carries at the age of 30 is more likely (in my opinion) to break down than a RB w/ 500 carries at the age of 24. The older you are the more likely you’re going to start breaking down. However,
3. Is a RB at the age of 30 going to start breaking down if he has had noticeably fewer carries (and therefore fewer hits absorbed) at that age than most other RB’s who HAVE started to break down at that age? Calendar age and number of carries are both important, and both have a lot of influence. I don’t know if one is “more” important than the other, but it’s possible. Regardless, both need to be considered as large pieces of the pie.
4. The number of carries in college should also play into the equation, if one RB has noticeably more carries in college than another.
5. Finally, the comparison that can only be qualitative/relative (but I would like us to try and assign some sort of reasonable numerical value), is running style. No one can say that Marcus Allen (for example) never took huge, devastating hits because he was an elusive back, but I also don’t think anyone could say that the first 1000 hits he took were as bad as the first 1000 LJ has taken, because IN GENERAL, LJ takes/induces more contact. So, LJ’s total carries when compared to someone else who is more elusive will result in more wear-and-tear on LJ than on who he is compared to.
The points I would love to see discussed further (and might require research that I don’t have the time for right now…but again, why I love this site):
1. How many carries has LJ had at his calendar age, vs. how many carries the other backs mentioned had at the same age?
2. Of those backs he’s being compared to, which ones were considered more “elusive”, and what sort of numerical value is reasonable to modify absolute number of carries so that they compare equivalently to LJ’s number of carries (since, per carry, he absorbs more punishment)?
3. Based on the inputs from 1 and 2, what sort of projections do we have as far as when LJ’s productivity will start to descend, and when will it start to plummet?
4. When can I be promoted to “editor” so that I can get a piece of that beer-ad money as well?
thehulk - May 2, 2008
just kidding, primetime
I know you have a tremendous amount of input into this site. But I sure hope you remember the people you used to play basketball with back in grade-school when you start living off your millions. Same goes for you, too, Chris. Although you played on the A team…
thehulk - May 2, 2008
RE
If you didn’t play on the A team, I didn’t know who you were.
Chris Thorman - May 2, 2008
I was the insanely muscled
guy with the green-tinged skin, that was a dominant force under the basket. You think that lightning last night was like paparazzi? you ain’t seen nothing till you’ve seen the flock that was following me back in 6th grade…
thehulk - May 2, 2008
Heh, heh...
...I have a feeling that someone’s planning to see “Iron Man” tonight :)
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
These are all excellent points
I agree that my breakdown of LJ is only cursory…sadly I don’t have the time to dig through all the stats and do a quantitative analysis (and college stats seem kind of difficult to come by for a lot of players…it took me a week to find the numbers for Brett Favre at Southern Miss because they don’t appear to be posted anywhere). But that’s probably merited for this topic.
The thing I’ve noticed, though, is that the 30-31 age group tends to be the redline for running backs where their yards per carry drop off significantly (which is why the carries likely drop off…because the coach thinks he can get better production from someone else). There are a couple of exceptions I’ve seen to that. Walter Payton, an elusive runner, got 300+ carries per year every year from age 29-32 and didn’t dip below 4.2 ypc in any of those seasons. Fred Taylor, a high-contact runner, has performed at a very high level at ages 30 and 31 (over 5 ypc the last two years) while having a high workload as a complementary back, and although I wouldn’t want to give him an LJ-like contract there’s a decent chance he could still be very good for a couple more years (although I think you’ll probably see his carries decline). I couldn’t find any other exceptions to this general rule, every other player I found who was used heavily after 30-31 had their production suffer greatly…which leads me to believe that the 30-31 age limit should be generally considered the end of a running back’s prime. I’ll caveat that by saying that LJ may be a special case due to his limited usage in college (and, as I said, I don’t have the other players’ college stats to go over), but I tend to be skeptical of that as the wear and tear in college is not as bad as that in the pros and the recuperation from it is easier since they’re younger.
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
Last comment addressed to thehulk
Sorry, forgot to specify that in the post.
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
good point about the college hits not having as much effect
I thought that while I was writing, but didn’t put it down anywhere. The hits a 29-year-old takes most definitely heal slower than the ones a 19-year old in college takes. I think where it really matters is when some backs have 500 carries in college, and others have 1000 (i don’t know what’s normal for a starting rb in college). a few hits here and there probably don’t matter much, but a difference of a few hundred I’m sure does.
as for Iron Man, I’ll probably wait until tomorrow morning, i have a theater nearby that does $4 Saturday matinees.
thehulk - May 2, 2008
College Stats
I wish I knew a site where they were readily available. Most of the places I’ve seen only track them back to 2002 or so, so it can be tough figuring out patterns over extended periods of time.
I’ll have to catch “Iron Man” on Sunday…got to take care of my mom this weekend (she’s got cancer and dad had to go out of town for a business trip).
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
Carries
And I agree with you that a difference of a few hundred carries may have a bigger effect in college. One of these days I’ll probably try and dig up Cadillac Williams’ stats from college…I’m curious how much he was used considering how heavily the injuries have piled up on him in only his first couple of years. I think he’s probably done as a pro thanks to that patellar tendon injury, though.
UCrawford - May 2, 2008
it's about the o-line
Jamall Charles could be the second coming of Jim Brown, but if our offensive line is still terrible, he’s not going to do anything.
HighPlainsGrifter - May 5, 2008
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Arrowhead Pride to post a comment.