I spent all week researching rookie RBs--not just this year, but for the past 20 years. My research spans all RBs drafted during the 15-season span of 2002 to 2016. Earlier data is tougher to come by, because I'm focused largely on college statistics, including a lot of junior-college numbers that tend to run dry beyond the last 20 years. More than 300 players are in this data set, which excludes numbers from active RBs. I took the liberty of declaring seemingly finished RBs like Adrian Peterson "not active" to help ensure the data's fairly up-to-date.
I want to take a couple minutes to share four findings, and how they *might* inform this year's rookie RB numbers. The stuff is fascinating. The question is whether it's enough to move us to act (or not act).
First, let's look at fantasy production based on round drafted. First-round RBs have averaged 1,054 fantasy points for their careers. Each following round has produced lower-producing RBs, on average: second round (603 fantasy points), third round (484), fourth round (288), fifth round (208), sixth round (129), and seventh round (99). None of this should be very surprising. This is essentially baseline data, which we can compare to other data based on varying conditions.
Second, let's look at one of those conditions: each RB's biggest college-season workload. The baseline numbers above are, again, 1,054, 603, 484, 288, 208, 129, and 99. But for all drafted RBs with at least one 250+ touch college season, these numbers are 1,069, 586, 544, 266, 330, 188, and 251.
You might be thinking, "This isn't very different." And it's not--at least for first-, second-, third-, and fourth-rounders. But as we dig into the later rounds, we can see relatively high-percentage upticks in fantasy production for RBs who've had at least one 250+ touch college campaign. Does this mean they're better equipped to acclimate to the NFL? Are they perceived by the coaching staff as more capable of handling spot-start duties? Lots of speculation, no obvious answers.
But it matters, because we can see the percentage shift first first- and even second-rounders is infinitesimal compared to *all* RBs. The percentage shift for third-/fourth-rounders is noticeable, but not necessarily actionable. Then as we get into the fifth and sixth rounds, we see a roughly 40%-55% uptick in fantasy production for RBs with at least one 250+ touch college season. And round seven? A more than 150% jump.
Third, let's look at highest-usage college seasons compared to college careers. We'll take each RB's biggest college workload, document the percentage of that RB's total college workload, and then average the percentages together. On average, the biggest college workload for a first rounder is 47% of their career college workload. A second rounder? Also 47%. Third-thru-seventh rounders? 49%, 44%, 48%, 45%, and 48%.
The similarities are striking. While there's plenty of percentage variances among RBs, the fact these avererages are so close together demonstrates that there's some kind of "best practice," or else a general order of things. Maybe in a few years, this order will break apart. For now, covering 15 years of data, it's compelling.
Finally, let's take the average of these seven percentages (47%) and go back to our 250+ touch RBs. Among these RBs, where their "biggest" college workload accounted for 50%+ of their total college workload, their average career fantasy point totals (from the first to the seventh rounds are 883, 707, 288, 134, 350, 31, and 236. In other words, most of these RBs (based on rounds) underperform compared to our baseline RBs.
But . . . if we examine 250+ touch RBs whose "biggest" workload accounted for *less* than 44% of their total college workload (three percentage points below 47%, rather than three percentage points above), the round-by-round fantasy-point totals are 1,204, 674, 658, 459, 316, 255, and 297. If we drop it to below 42%, the numbers are even more interesting: 1,429, 689, 667, 519, 345, 269, and 336. Does this mean RBs with high-volume experience--and with a more balanced career college workload--fare better? Based on the data, by and large, yes.
As we explore this year's rookies, we might keep this data in mind.
---
Sign up for my 2022 Fantasy Draft Rankings ("PFN Pass") or 1:1 Advisory Services ("Touchdown Pass"):
https://pass.profootballnetwork.com/
I want to take a couple minutes to share four findings, and how they *might* inform this year's rookie RB numbers. The stuff is fascinating. The question is whether it's enough to move us to act (or not act).
First, let's look at fantasy production based on round drafted. First-round RBs have averaged 1,054 fantasy points for their careers. Each following round has produced lower-producing RBs, on average: second round (603 fantasy points), third round (484), fourth round (288), fifth round (208), sixth round (129), and seventh round (99). None of this should be very surprising. This is essentially baseline data, which we can compare to other data based on varying conditions.
Second, let's look at one of those conditions: each RB's biggest college-season workload. The baseline numbers above are, again, 1,054, 603, 484, 288, 208, 129, and 99. But for all drafted RBs with at least one 250+ touch college season, these numbers are 1,069, 586, 544, 266, 330, 188, and 251.
You might be thinking, "This isn't very different." And it's not--at least for first-, second-, third-, and fourth-rounders. But as we dig into the later rounds, we can see relatively high-percentage upticks in fantasy production for RBs who've had at least one 250+ touch college campaign. Does this mean they're better equipped to acclimate to the NFL? Are they perceived by the coaching staff as more capable of handling spot-start duties? Lots of speculation, no obvious answers.
But it matters, because we can see the percentage shift first first- and even second-rounders is infinitesimal compared to *all* RBs. The percentage shift for third-/fourth-rounders is noticeable, but not necessarily actionable. Then as we get into the fifth and sixth rounds, we see a roughly 40%-55% uptick in fantasy production for RBs with at least one 250+ touch college season. And round seven? A more than 150% jump.
Third, let's look at highest-usage college seasons compared to college careers. We'll take each RB's biggest college workload, document the percentage of that RB's total college workload, and then average the percentages together. On average, the biggest college workload for a first rounder is 47% of their career college workload. A second rounder? Also 47%. Third-thru-seventh rounders? 49%, 44%, 48%, 45%, and 48%.
The similarities are striking. While there's plenty of percentage variances among RBs, the fact these avererages are so close together demonstrates that there's some kind of "best practice," or else a general order of things. Maybe in a few years, this order will break apart. For now, covering 15 years of data, it's compelling.
Finally, let's take the average of these seven percentages (47%) and go back to our 250+ touch RBs. Among these RBs, where their "biggest" college workload accounted for 50%+ of their total college workload, their average career fantasy point totals (from the first to the seventh rounds are 883, 707, 288, 134, 350, 31, and 236. In other words, most of these RBs (based on rounds) underperform compared to our baseline RBs.
But . . . if we examine 250+ touch RBs whose "biggest" workload accounted for *less* than 44% of their total college workload (three percentage points below 47%, rather than three percentage points above), the round-by-round fantasy-point totals are 1,204, 674, 658, 459, 316, 255, and 297. If we drop it to below 42%, the numbers are even more interesting: 1,429, 689, 667, 519, 345, 269, and 336. Does this mean RBs with high-volume experience--and with a more balanced career college workload--fare better? Based on the data, by and large, yes.
As we explore this year's rookies, we might keep this data in mind.
---
Sign up for my 2022 Fantasy Draft Rankings ("PFN Pass") or 1:1 Advisory Services ("Touchdown Pass"):
https://pass.profootballnetwork.com/