[stupac2]

In some thread a couple weeks ago I did an analysis where I went through every one of McCaffrey's and Henry's games, removed their respective team from the opponent's rushing YPC, looked at how many excess yards they gained relative to the opponent's average, and then totaled it up to give a season-wide "yards per carry over average". Henry came out ahead, and I said it softened me on his Voldemort candidacy.

Well, now we're at the end of the year, so I added the extra games (and tweaked my methodology so it makes a bit more sense, I'm honestly not sure exactly what I was going for before, but I think it was a less decipherable path to the same spot with the excel formulas). I also added in Cook, Elliot, and Fournette. Here's the skinny:

Code:

Name        EYPC
Cook        4.1
Elliot      2.2
Fournette   2.3
Henry       1.9
McCaffrey   1.4

Cook is, by far, the best pure running back by this analysis. It's not even close. I actually had to double-check to make sure I didn't screw up importing the numbers somehow, but he really does have games where he's running for 8+ ypc. It's nutty.

Anyway, as expected McCaffrey's value isn't that he's a great running back, but all the other things he does. For instance, his 540 receiving yards and 13.2 YPC easily leads the other backs, with the next closest total yards being less than half, and the next closest YPC being a full 1.6 yards below him. I don't believe any of the other backs field punts or kicks, so that's pure bonus for value he generates.

[stupac2]

In some thread a couple weeks ago I did an analysis where I went through every one of McCaffrey's and Henry's games, removed their respective team from the opponent's rushing YPC, looked at how many excess yards they gained relative to the opponent's average, and then totaled it up to give a season-wide "yards per carry over average". Henry came out ahead, and I said it softened me on his Voldemort candidacy.

Well, now we're at the end of the year, so I added the extra games (and tweaked my methodology so it makes a bit more sense, I'm honestly not sure exactly what I was going for before, but I think it was a less decipherable path to the same spot with the excel formulas). I also added in Cook, Elliot, and Fournette. Here's the skinny:

Code:

Name        EYPC
Cook        4.1
Elliot      2.2
Fournette   2.3
Henry       1.9
McCaffrey   1.4

Cook is, by far, the best pure running back by this analysis. It's not even close. I actually had to double-check to make sure I didn't screw up importing the numbers somehow, but he really does have games where he's running for 8+ ypc. It's nutty.

Anyway, as expected McCaffrey's value isn't that he's a great running back, but all the other things he does. For instance, his 540 receiving yards and 13.2 YPC easily leads the other backs, with the next closest total yards being less than half, and the next closest YPC being a full 1.6 yards below him. I don't believe any of the other backs field punts or kicks, so that's pure bonus for value he generates.

[CTcard]

Here's the skinny:

Code:

Name        EYPC
Cook        4.1
Elliot      2.2
Fournette   2.3
Henry       1.9
McCaffrey   1.4

So, the wrong guys are in NYC?

[CTcard]

Here's the skinny:

Code:

Name        EYPC
Cook        4.1
Elliot      2.2
Fournette   2.3
Henry       1.9
McCaffrey   1.4

So, the wrong guys are in NYC?

[stupac2]

It depends on your perspective. Henry's ability to put up those numbers with his ridiculous number of carries is obviously meaningful, even if his per-carry average isn't all that special. McCaffrey might not be the best running back at running the ball, but he's easily the best (of this group, at least) at catching, plus returns. So that's something.

I do think it's very strange that Cook never had much Voldemort momentum. His stats are crazy.

[stupac2]

It depends on your perspective. Henry's ability to put up those numbers with his ridiculous number of carries is obviously meaningful, even if his per-carry average isn't all that special. McCaffrey might not be the best running back at running the ball, but he's easily the best (of this group, at least) at catching, plus returns. So that's something.

I do think it's very strange that Cook never had much Voldemort momentum. His stats are crazy.

[rudruff]

I think his familiarity with the Tallahassee Police Department prior to this season has muted any PR campaign by FSU.

[rudruff]

I think his familiarity with the Tallahassee Police Department prior to this season has muted any PR campaign by FSU.

[stupac2]

I think his familiarity with the Tallahassee Police Department prior to this season has muted any PR campaign by FSU.

I'm not aware of any off-the-field shenanigans by him. Then again, that hasn't stopped previous FSU Voldemort contenders...

[stupac2]

I think his familiarity with the Tallahassee Police Department prior to this season has muted any PR campaign by FSU.

I'm not aware of any off-the-field shenanigans by him. Then again, that hasn't stopped previous FSU Voldemort contenders...

[BostonCard]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...ery-charge

Bc

[BostonCard]

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...ery-charge

Bc

[stupac2]

Ah, this sounds familiar, but didn't it end up being that the woman repeatedly called him a "n****r"? I might be thinking of something else but IIRC the whole thing got dropped because there wasn't a case there, very much unlike the Jameis situation.

[stupac2]

Ah, this sounds familiar, but didn't it end up being that the woman repeatedly called him a "n****r"? I might be thinking of something else but IIRC the whole thing got dropped because there wasn't a case there, very much unlike the Jameis situation.

[BostonCard]

He was acquitted:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...ttery-case

Looks like there was reasonable doubt.

Still, If you read the first article, Trouble seems to find Cook.

BC

[BostonCard]

He was acquitted:

http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...ttery-case

Looks like there was reasonable doubt.

Still, If you read the first article, Trouble seems to find Cook.

BC

[winflop]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=13968.msg146598#msg146598 date=1449525911]
Here's the skinny:

Code:

Name        EYPC
Cook        4.1
Elliot      2.2
Fournette   2.3
Henry       1.9
McCaffrey   1.4

So, the wrong guys are in NYC?
[/quote]

No, wrong guys being considered for Doak Walker.  Voldemort goes to the best PLAYER and we all know who that is - the all time leader in yards per touch.

[winflop]

[quote author=stupac2 link=topic=13968.msg146598#msg146598 date=1449525911]
Here's the skinny:

Code:

Name        EYPC
Cook        4.1
Elliot      2.2
Fournette   2.3
Henry       1.9
McCaffrey   1.4

So, the wrong guys are in NYC?
[/quote]

No, wrong guys being considered for Doak Walker.  Voldemort goes to the best PLAYER and we all know who that is - the all time leader in yards per touch.

[needle]

Not sure about this analysis, as it could be skewed by a game where the RB gets only a few carries but busts a long one.

In other words, do the same calculation but include Bryce Love and he might have the most impressive stats.

I would hesitantly say that "EYPG" might be a better metric?

[needle]

Not sure about this analysis, as it could be skewed by a game where the RB gets only a few carries but busts a long one.

In other words, do the same calculation but include Bryce Love and he might have the most impressive stats.

I would hesitantly say that "EYPG" might be a better metric?

[stupac2]

Not sure about this analysis, as it could be skewed by a game where the RB gets only a few carries but busts a long one.

In other words, do the same calculation but include Bryce Love and he might have the most impressive stats.

I would hesitantly say that "EYPG" might be a better metric?

In fact that happened, Cook had a game with two carries for 84 yards. Removing that game took down his yardage by a lot, from 4.1 to 3.7, but that's basically the craziest outlier game you can have and it didn't affect things that much, and that was the only game by any back with fewer than 12 carries, so I don't think that's a big issue. Anyway here's that number:

Code:

Name        EYPG
Cook        80.9
Elliot      50.2
Fournette   61.5
Henry       51.0
McCaffrey   33.5

That looks pretty much the same, though it does make Fournette look better.

[stupac2]

Not sure about this analysis, as it could be skewed by a game where the RB gets only a few carries but busts a long one.

In other words, do the same calculation but include Bryce Love and he might have the most impressive stats.

I would hesitantly say that "EYPG" might be a better metric?

In fact that happened, Cook had a game with two carries for 84 yards. Removing that game took down his yardage by a lot, from 4.1 to 3.7, but that's basically the craziest outlier game you can have and it didn't affect things that much, and that was the only game by any back with fewer than 12 carries, so I don't think that's a big issue. Anyway here's that number:

Code:

Name        EYPG
Cook        80.9
Elliot      50.2
Fournette   61.5
Henry       51.0
McCaffrey   33.5

That looks pretty much the same, though it does make Fournette look better.