A little over a year ago, when social distancing was reserved for introverts, I examined the 182 times a running back had earned 350+ touches in a year through the 2018 season. Then I narrowed the list to 164, removing all performances from 1977 (because the NFL expanded from 14 to 16 games in 1978), 1981 (because of the strike-shortened 1982 season), and 1986 (because the 1987 strike limited most NFL regulars to 12-13 games). I also excluded players who were suspended or who held out for one or more games the following season, as well as players who retired the following season (even if that player returned later that season or in future seasons, like Ricky Williams).
Normally I spend a lot of May and June doing research like this. I enjoy investigating whether conventional wisdoms can be proven or disproven--or at least, somewhat proven or disproven, since absolutes in sports don't exist.
This project produced some fascinating, actionable results. For example, in the season following a 350+ touch campaign, RBs' production dropped, on average, from 306.8 fantasy points to 238.7 fantasy points--a 68.1 (22%) point drop. Following a 400+ touch campaign, RBs' production dropped, on average, from 347.6 fantasy points to 250.9 fantasy points--a 96.7 point (28%) drop. In fact, 72% of RBs scored fewer fantasy points the season after a 350+ touch campaign, while 80% who scored fewer points the season after a 400+ touch campaign.
Some of this drop-off could be attributed to injuries, as RBs averaged 1.9 fewer games the season after a 350+ touch campaign, as well as the season after a 400+ touch campaign. However, per-game fantasy production was 2.9 points lower the year after a 350+ touch effort, and 4.5 points lower right after a 400+ touch effort.
My conclusion wasn't surprising: If you're playing the percentages (which I think is a perpetual key to fantasy success), then investing in an RB immediately after a heavy-workload season carries too much risk. Really, why roll the dice on a roughly 20% chance of meeting or exceeding expectations (assuming ADP aligns pretty closely with the previous year's production)?
That brings me to Christian McCaffrey. Admittedly, I publicly doubted his ability to maintain last year's superhuman numbers. Yet he never slowed down, and ended up with one of the greatest fantasy football seasons in history. So of course he's the universal #1 heading into this year's draft. 116 of 127 experts on Fantasy Pros place him atop the RB heap. Only three brave people place him outside the top 2 (with The Fantasy Headliners' Kyle Richardson ranking him 6th).
But let's look again at history. Time and again, 400+ touch backs noticeably regress the following year. Few doubted Steven Jackson after his breakout 2006 campaign. He was CMC's age and posted similar numbers across the board. But in 2007 he dealt with injuries and averaged nine points less per game. LaDainian Tomlinson and Larry Johnson experienced sizable drop-offs that same year after their huge, 400+ touch 2006 seasons. Meanwhile, entering 2015, DeMarco Murray was, in other circles, a seemingly can't-miss elite RB. Didn't work out well for fantasy managers who lunged for him in the first round.
There's a trend here, and we can't just ignore it out of convenience. CMC seems invincible, because we've seen him look invincible. But that doesn't mean he's a sure thing.
We need to play the percentages. The chance that CMC is a top-5 RB--that he plays all 16 games and can produce at or near last season's per-game level--is slim based on historical data. While data isn't everything, it's a window into the toll a heavy workload often has on RBs.
Normally I spend a lot of May and June doing research like this. I enjoy investigating whether conventional wisdoms can be proven or disproven--or at least, somewhat proven or disproven, since absolutes in sports don't exist.
This project produced some fascinating, actionable results. For example, in the season following a 350+ touch campaign, RBs' production dropped, on average, from 306.8 fantasy points to 238.7 fantasy points--a 68.1 (22%) point drop. Following a 400+ touch campaign, RBs' production dropped, on average, from 347.6 fantasy points to 250.9 fantasy points--a 96.7 point (28%) drop. In fact, 72% of RBs scored fewer fantasy points the season after a 350+ touch campaign, while 80% who scored fewer points the season after a 400+ touch campaign.
Some of this drop-off could be attributed to injuries, as RBs averaged 1.9 fewer games the season after a 350+ touch campaign, as well as the season after a 400+ touch campaign. However, per-game fantasy production was 2.9 points lower the year after a 350+ touch effort, and 4.5 points lower right after a 400+ touch effort.
My conclusion wasn't surprising: If you're playing the percentages (which I think is a perpetual key to fantasy success), then investing in an RB immediately after a heavy-workload season carries too much risk. Really, why roll the dice on a roughly 20% chance of meeting or exceeding expectations (assuming ADP aligns pretty closely with the previous year's production)?
That brings me to Christian McCaffrey. Admittedly, I publicly doubted his ability to maintain last year's superhuman numbers. Yet he never slowed down, and ended up with one of the greatest fantasy football seasons in history. So of course he's the universal #1 heading into this year's draft. 116 of 127 experts on Fantasy Pros place him atop the RB heap. Only three brave people place him outside the top 2 (with The Fantasy Headliners' Kyle Richardson ranking him 6th).
But let's look again at history. Time and again, 400+ touch backs noticeably regress the following year. Few doubted Steven Jackson after his breakout 2006 campaign. He was CMC's age and posted similar numbers across the board. But in 2007 he dealt with injuries and averaged nine points less per game. LaDainian Tomlinson and Larry Johnson experienced sizable drop-offs that same year after their huge, 400+ touch 2006 seasons. Meanwhile, entering 2015, DeMarco Murray was, in other circles, a seemingly can't-miss elite RB. Didn't work out well for fantasy managers who lunged for him in the first round.
There's a trend here, and we can't just ignore it out of convenience. CMC seems invincible, because we've seen him look invincible. But that doesn't mean he's a sure thing.
We need to play the percentages. The chance that CMC is a top-5 RB--that he plays all 16 games and can produce at or near last season's per-game level--is slim based on historical data. While data isn't everything, it's a window into the toll a heavy workload often has on RBs.