Jump to content
NBC Sports EDGE Forums

Christian McCaffrey 2022 Outlook


Flyman75
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, FFCollusion said:

You seem to consistently make the same conclusion, that Najee can never be as effecient as CMC and I think that's a mistake on your part, but your perogatve.

Same workload, to write off a rookie RBs first season as if he'll never improve, seems unreasonable.  It'll be a completely different offense without Big Ben I assume, but I don't know that for sure.

What I do know, is that 400 looks is the first requirement to meet the "ceiling" we're discussing right?

So there are 2 questions.  Is CMC getting that workload?  Najee is.

Which of the 2 players are more likely to be as effecient as 2019 CMC?  2022 7 injuries later CMC or Najee?

That's definitely up for debate.

If both are going to play 17 games, CMC has the higher ceiling, because... of course he does. 

If someone prefers Najee for the higher floor and "safer" pick, that's fine. 

CMC has the upside of "best fantasy RB season ever". I don't think Najee does, realistically. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, FFCollusion said:

You seem to consistently make the same conclusion, that Najee can never be as effecient as CMC and I think that's a mistake on your part, but your perogatve.

Same workload, to write off a rookie RBs first season as if he'll never improve, seems unreasonable.  It'll be a completely different offense without Big Ben I assume, but I don't know that for sure.

What I do know, is that 400 looks is the first requirement to meet the "ceiling" we're discussing right?

So there are 2 questions.  Is CMC getting that workload?  Najee is.

Which of the 2 players are more likely to be as effecient as 2019 CMC?  2022 7 injuries later CMC or Najee?

That's definitely up for debate.

 

14 minutes ago, Savatage79 said:

But from my recollection he was going into last year healthy as well, it's why he went right back to #1 pick 

I don't think we've even remotely seen Najees ceiling, especially as they make improvements on the line. 

My point isn't that cmc couldnt crush it, it's that his adp never seems to account for the fact he's been pretty unreliable.

I don't get why the fantasy world doesn't dictate and say cmc is healthy but he belongs in that 6-9 range until he proves he can actually put a near to full season in again. 

I just think #2 is so steep given we've had 2 years now of disappointment. Same with barkley but now people are finally doing what I'm saying here, putting the player in a more accurate adp until he proves otherwise 

So over the past ten years, only four players have gotten more touches than Najee did last year with 386.  It is extremely unlikely that he ever sees more in his career.  Also, say what you will about Rothelisberger, but I believe him even last year to be a better quarterback than Trubisky ever has been. 

They haven't made any significant improvements to the offensive line or the receivers to create better lanes for him or back more guys out of the box.  Maybe conditions weren't great for the amount of volume he got last year, but they haven't improved (I would make the argument they got worse) and just based on recent history and odds it is unlikely he exceeds last year's volume.

So the argument here is, well we have to raise the floor because even though he had a ton of volume another year in the league is automatically going to make him better?  I don't know about that.

What I do know is that Christian McCaffrey, despite having a bad quarterback situation and an average offensive line averaged 1 and a half more yards per touch than him when being given touches that are in the ballpark of what he got last year in 2019, and that amounted to over 500 more yards and 50 more fantasy points when he reached his ceiling.

So I don't see a whole lot of evidence that Harris's ceiling is higher.  I get that we sometimes have to predict things that haven't happened before because we don't want last year's numbers, but calling Harris a better ceiling player just doesn't compute with anything we have seen.

Edited by JE7HorseGod
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, ajs723 said:

If both are going to play 17 games, CMC has the higher ceiling, because... of course he does. 

If someone prefers Najee for the higher floor and "safer" pick, that's fine. 

CMC has the upside of "best fantasy RB season ever". I don't think Najee does, realistically. 

Exactly.

If your "best case scenario" for Christian McCaffrey includes missing a bunch of games this year, or stripping him down to 300 touches or something like that, well it isn't a true "best case scenario."

If your "best case scenario" for Najee Harris is that he averages 5.9 yards per touch and still gets 400 touches, I don't think that's realistic. 

If you feel it is more likely that Harris gets enough volume to supercede McCaffrey's likely superior efficiency, that maybe true, but then that is a floor play.

Edited by JE7HorseGod
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm of the opinion that these aren't just fluke injuries.  I posted about it last summer how the Panthers were transitioning from a grass field to artificial, which the NFLPA documents as being responsible for 69% more soft tissue non contact injuries than grass.  Add to that his size, previous workload, injury history, and draft spot and i don't think there's a more risky pick in the draft.  I'll take him every week in DFS if he's still got his traditional role but I'm passing on him in season long leagues.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ajs723 said:

If both are going to play 17 games, CMC has the higher ceiling, because... of course he does. 

If someone prefers Najee for the higher floor and "safer" pick, that's fine. 

CMC has the upside of "best fantasy RB season ever". I don't think Najee does, realistically. 

 

1 hour ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Exactly.

If your "best case scenario" for Christian McCaffrey includes missing a bunch of games this year, or stripping him down to 300 touches or something like that, well it isn't a true "best case scenario."

If your "best case scenario" for Najee Harris is that he averages 5.9 yards per touch and still gets 400 touches, I don't think that's realistic. 

If you feel it is more likely that Harris gets enough volume to supercede McCaffrey's likely superior efficiency, that maybe true, but then that is a floor play.

I'll address these at the same time because they're the same line of thinking:

No CMC does not have the best fantasy RB season ever ceiling. Similarly, stripping CMCs touches isn't some crazy idea or stripping him of the best true case scenario.  I've already outlined why I think his ceiling isn't as high. I expect his touches to decline. We can play the "well he TECHNICALLY has best season ever potential" with almost anyone. 

Why is it not a true best case scenario because I strip his touches but for Najee 5.9 yards per touch is some absurd number? Your definition of best case scenario is molded to fit the narrative you choose to believe. In my eyes, CMC getting 400 touches again is just as absurd as Harris getting 5.9 yards per touch if not more so. 

To have best season OF ALL TIME ceiling you need to have volume opportunity AND points per touch opportunity. Simply put: I don't believe CMC has the volume. Najee has the volume and there's a scenario for the Steelers to be good enough for Harris to get solid points per touch.

I'm not saying CMC can't come out and dominate. There's always the chance the Panthers are dumb enough to give him 400 touches again. That just isn't within the realm of reasonable outcome for me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, rocklandrew said:

 I posted about it last summer how the Panthers were transitioning from a grass field to artificial, which the NFLPA documents as being responsible for 69% more soft tissue non contact injuries than grass.  

Perhaps that might be a reason for elevated injury concern moving forward, I suppose, but he got hurt last year in Miami and the year before at Tampa and Arrowhead.

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/McCaCh01/gamelog/

Edited by JE7HorseGod
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

Why is it not a true best case scenario because I strip his touches but for Najee 5.9 yards per touch is some absurd number? Your definition of best case scenario is molded to fit the narrative you choose to believe. In my eyes, CMC getting 400 touches again is just as absurd as Harris getting 5.9 yards per touch if not more so.

McCaffrey has never had a season below 4.9 yards per touch.

Even last year when he was battling injury and in and out of games he was at 5.8.  That's his career average.

A yard and half more per touch over the course of 350-400 touches is a huge increase.  There is no other first rounder out there who has ever experienced that type of efficiency increase in his career.  Not Henry:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HenrDe00.htm

Not Cook:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CookDa01.htm

Not Taylor:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TaylJo02.htm

Basically you are making the argument that the best case scenario for Harris is that he achieves one of the highest efficiency increases for a bellcow RB in NFL history, while maintaining his volume, in spite of losing a HoF QB (who I concede was not playing well that last year, but still) and replacing him with a guy who lost his starting job in Chicago and was a backup in Buffalo last year, made no substantial changes to a poor run blocking offensive line, and with the same cast of characters at WR.

My argument for McCaffrey's best case scenario is for HIM TO DO SOMETHING HE HAS ALREADY DONE.

That's the difference.  That's why I don't think it is realistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, JE7HorseGod said:

McCaffrey has never had a season below 4.9 yards per touch.

Even last year when he was battling injury and in and out of games he was at 5.8.  That's his career average.

A yard and half more per touch over the course of 350-400 touches is a huge increase.  There is no other first rounder out there who has ever experienced that type of efficiency increase in his career.  Not Henry:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/H/HenrDe00.htm

Not Cook:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/C/CookDa01.htm

Not Taylor:

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/T/TaylJo02.htm

Basically you are making the argument that the best case scenario for Harris is that he achieves one of the highest efficiency increases for a bellcow RB in NFL history, while maintaining his volume, in spite of losing a HoF QB (who I concede was not playing well that last year, but still) and replacing him with a guy who lost his starting job in Chicago and was a backup in Buffalo last year, made no substantial changes to a poor run blocking offensive line, and with the same cast of characters at WR.

My argument for McCaffrey's best case scenario is for HIM TO DO SOMETHING HE HAS ALREADY DONE.

That's the difference.  That's why I don't think it is realistic.

I think this is the problem and a weak argument.

Can Julio Jones have one of the greatest WR seasons because "it's something he's done"?

I know it's comparing apples to oranges and obviously they aren't in the same stages of their career but it illustrates the problem in the argument. Just because he did it earlier in his career does not mean he can still do it. 

So again:

CMC isn't getting the volume he had in his prime. So his ceiling isn't as high.

That's it. That's all it comes down to.

Ekeler was at 5.6 yards per touch last year. Is anyone going to argue he has best season of all time potential? No. I already mentioned him on the last page. He got absurd efficency, somehow lucked into 20 TDs, and still didn't even finish as RB1 ON THE YEAR. Let alone talking historic seasons. 

You aren't having an all time season without volume. Period. CMC won't have the volume. That's my argument in a nutshell. I don't care about his past seasons for reasons I mentioned already nor is his efficency particuarly relevant to the argument I am making. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

I think this is the problem and a weak argument.

Can Julio Jones have one of the greatest WR seasons because "it's something he's done"?

Can he?  Sure.  But I think if you're attempting to argue "has happened before to other types of players in NFL history" I don't think we have a similar understanding of what "realism" means.

Using that logic, I could say, "well LaDamien Tomlinson once scored 26 touchdowns in a season, therefore it is realistic to expect DeAndre Swift's ceiling is 26 touchdowns.  Therefore DeAndre Swift has the highest ceiling in FF."

I mean if you want to use that kind of logic to inform your terminology and drafting strategies, ultimately it's your board, do you.

But I don't find that type of argument compelling personally.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

I think this is the problem and a weak argument.

Can Julio Jones have one of the greatest WR seasons because "it's something he's done"?

I know it's comparing apples to oranges and obviously they aren't in the same stages of their career but it illustrates the problem in the argument. Just because he did it earlier in his career does not mean he can still do it. 

So again:

CMC isn't getting the volume he had in his prime. So his ceiling isn't as high.

That's it. That's all it comes down to.

Ekeler was at 5.6 yards per touch last year. Is anyone going to argue he has best season of all time potential? No. I already mentioned him on the last page. He got absurd efficency, somehow lucked into 20 TDs, and still didn't even finish as RB1 ON THE YEAR. Let alone talking historic seasons. 

You aren't having an all time season without volume. Period. CMC won't have the volume. That's my argument in a nutshell. I don't care about his past seasons for reasons I mentioned already nor is his efficency particuarly relevant to the argument I am making. 

Sorry I misunderstood what you meant with Julio in my last response.

Julio is 33 years old.  McCaffrey is 26.  Julio experienced a dramatic downturn in his career efficiency last season.  McCaffrey's yards per touch was exactly the same.  Julio now has a role where he might be the 3rd or 4th most targeted WR on the team.  McCaffrey is undoubtedly the guy who if healthy will lead his team, and perhaps the league (despite what people are saying in July) in touches per game.  You're comparing apples to spaceships.

And the argument for Harris having a higher ceiling is what I posted above, "he can do something he's never done before because other players have in NFL history."  I don't see how you don't see that is thinner than "he might be able to stay healthy and return to form."

But again, it's your board and your subjective terms, so do you.

Edited by JE7HorseGod
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Can he?  Sure.  But I think if you're attempting to argue "has happened before to other types of players in NFL history" I don't think we have a similar understanding of what "realism" means.

Using that logic, I could say, "well LaDamien Tomlinson once scored 26 touchdowns in a season, therefore it is realistic to expect DeAndre Swift's ceiling is 26 touchdowns.  Therefore DeAndre Swift has the highest ceiling in FF."

I mean if you want to use that kind of logic to inform your terminology and drafting strategies, ultimately it's your board, do you.

But I don't find that type of argument compelling personally.

You'd be correct.

TECHNICALLY Swift can score 26 TDs. I mean, it's possible. However, within the realm of reasonable possibility? Not happening.

Just like TECHNICALLY CMC can get 400 touches again. However, it's not going to happen.

1 minute ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Sorry I misunderstood what you meant with Julio in my last response.

Julio is 32 years old.  McCaffrey is 26.  Julio experienced a dramatic downturn in his career efficiency last season.  McCaffrey's yards per touch was exactly the same.  Julio now has a role where he might be the 3rd or 4th most targeted WR on the team.  McCaffrey is undoubtedly the guy who if healthy will lead his team, and perhaps the league (despite what people are saying in July) in touches per game.  You're comparing apples to spaceships.

And the argument for Harris having a higher ceiling is what I posted above, "he can do something he's never done before because other players have in NFL history."  I don't see how you don't see that is thinner than "he might be able to stay healthy and return to form."

But again, it's your board and your subjective terms, so do you.

My argument had nothing to do with Julio vs CMC. The sole purpose was to use hyperbole to point out the flaw in using past seasons to justify something. Don't get me wrong, past seasons come into play obviously but when the entire argument seemingly hinges on the past it doesn't hold water to me. To me, it seems very obvious CMC is in for a decline in volume. So saying he did it in the past doesn't matter. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

CMC isn't getting the volume he had in his prime.

In short, it is much easier for me to make the case that this isn't true than it is for you to make the case that Najee Harris increases his yards per touch to a place where it would be comprable with McCaffrey's.

It's easier for you to make the case that Harris will stay healthy and receive the same volume as he did last year than that McCaffrey will.

That's why McCaffrey is the "ceiling" play and Harris is the "floor" play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

 

I'll address these at the same time because they're the same line of thinking:

No CMC does not have the best fantasy RB season ever ceiling. Similarly, stripping CMCs touches isn't some crazy idea or stripping him of the best true case scenario.  I've already outlined why I think his ceiling isn't as high. I expect his touches to decline. We can play the "well he TECHNICALLY has best season ever potential" with almost anyone. 

Why is it not a true best case scenario because I strip his touches but for Najee 5.9 yards per touch is some absurd number? Your definition of best case scenario is molded to fit the narrative you choose to believe. In my eyes, CMC getting 400 touches again is just as absurd as Harris getting 5.9 yards per touch if not more so. 

To have best season OF ALL TIME ceiling you need to have volume opportunity AND points per touch opportunity. Simply put: I don't believe CMC has the volume. Najee has the volume and there's a scenario for the Steelers to be good enough for Harris to get solid points per touch.

I'm not saying CMC can't come out and dominate. There's always the chance the Panthers are dumb enough to give him 400 touches again. That just isn't within the realm of reasonable outcome for me. 

Counterpoint, why would the Panthers NOT run CMC into the ground. They will get everything they can out of him until he dies, IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Every time CMC got hurt in the last 2 years the concern was always "oh they might taper down his workload to keep him healthy when he comes back." Same **** with Dalvin. No. They never did. They are paying him north of 15 million per year, they are going to use him until the wheels fall off. There's absolutely no point in resting your best offensive weapon when he's healthy beyond his need for an occasional breather. Injuries are flukey.

CMC is not rotating drives with Donta Foreman.

Edited by harck
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, harck said:

Every time CMC got hurt in the last 2 years the concern was always "oh they might taper down his workload to keep him healthy when he comes back." Same **** with Dalvin. No. They never did. They are paying him north of 15 million per year, they are going to use him until the wheels fall off. There's absolutely no point in resting your best offensive weapon when he's healthy beyond his need for an occasional breather. Injuries are flukey.

CMC is not rotating drives with Donta Foreman.

Right. And part of it is he’s so good it’s hard not to give him the ball in the passing game.. if he beats the man covering him like he does 90% of the time is the QB supposed to not pass it to him to limit his touches? He’s the best 3rd down back in the league so he’s likely not missing those snaps. The coach’s will have to limit him on the much less valuable running downs 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, harck said:

Every time CMC got hurt in the last 2 years the concern was always "oh they might taper down his workload to keep him healthy when he comes back." Same **** with Dalvin. No. They never did. They are paying him north of 15 million per year, they are going to use him until the wheels fall off. There's absolutely no point in resting your best offensive weapon when he's healthy beyond his need for an occasional breather. Injuries are flukey.

CMC is not rotating drives with Donta Foreman.

Yeah, the idea that they are going to "manage his pitch count" or whatever to protect his long term health seems to me to more frequently be a summer time talking point and doesn't seem to be a thing when you are playing with live ammo and you're down by 4 points in October and need a third down conversion.

But on @Gohawkspoint, you can have a PROJECTION, but that doesn't mean that is your projection for a player's CEILING.  In my mind those should be two different concepts.  If you're familiar with the term BATNA, then I would say the CEILING should be your initial offer and best possible result, the FLOOR should be your "walk away" point and the PROJECTION should be somewhere in the middle and what you think is most likely to happen.

I think it's totally fair game to have a higher FLOOR for Najee, and perhaps even a higher PROJECTION, but I don't see anyway based on the information we have at our disposal that it is realistic to have a higher CEILING.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, FFCollusion said:

 that Najee can never be as effecient as CMC and I think that's a mistake on your part, but your perogatve.

Same workload, to write off a rookie RBs first season as if he'll never improve, seems unreasonable.

Read this again.

"Improve?"  Sure I could buy that.

"Improve by a yard and a half per touch in a year?"  I literally cannot find an example of that happening with a guy who had over 200 touches.  Like MGIII had a storied and epic turnaround from his rookie year inefficiency, he went from 3.8 to 4.8. 

For the most part yards per touch does stay remarkably consistent through a RBs career if you look at the examples.  Half a yard is probably outside of the standard deviation of percentage of players that have 200 touches two years in a row.

And again, why would he improve that much?  The reason for the inefficiency is that the offensive line was bad and the passing game was toothless and everyone in the stadium knew he was getting the ball.  Literally nothing about that situation has changed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, JE7HorseGod said:

Yeah, the idea that they are going to "manage his pitch count" or whatever to protect his long term health seems to me to more frequently be a summer time talking point and doesn't seem to be a thing when you are playing with live ammo and you're down by 4 points in October and need a third down conversion.

But on @Gohawkspoint, you can have a PROJECTION, but that doesn't mean that is your projection for a player's CEILING.  In my mind those should be two different concepts.  If you're familiar with the term BATNA, then I would say the CEILING should be your initial offer and best possible result, the FLOOR should be your "walk away" point and the PROJECTION should be somewhere in the middle and what you think is most likely to happen.

I think it's totally fair game to have a higher FLOOR for Najee, and perhaps even a higher PROJECTION, but I don't see anyway based on the information we have at our disposal that it is realistic to have a higher CEILING.

Right and this is where we disagree and that’s alright.

I think a 400 touch ceiling for CMC is absurd just like you think a 5.5 YPT ceiling is absurd for Najee.

Also, yes floor/projection/ceiling all play into it. I’ve talked about this multiple times on this forum. For example, someone like Fournette I PROJECT near his ADP yet I don’t want to draft him there because I think his ceiling is so low.

Theres like 5 backs I think have a ceiling of all time great type of fantasy season if everything lines up. Two of them are Swift and Barkley. Neither of which I’d take in the top 15. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Gohawks said:

Right and this is where we disagree and that’s alright.

I think a 400 touch ceiling for CMC is absurd just like you think a 5.5 YPT ceiling is absurd for Najee.

Also, yes floor/projection/ceiling all play into it. I’ve talked about this multiple times on this forum. For example, someone like Fournette I PROJECT near his ADP yet I don’t want to draft him there because I think his ceiling is so low.

Theres like 5 backs I think have a ceiling of all time great type of fantasy season if everything lines up. Two of them are Swift and Barkley. Neither of which I’d take in the top 15. 

Right, so let's say you have 3 betters (bettors?).

Better A has a 1/6 chance to win $20, their motto is "go big or go home and swing for the fences."

Better B has a 1/3 chance to win $10, their motto is, "I trust my numbers."

Better C has a 1/2 chance to win $5, their motto is, "you can't win in the first round but you can lose it."

To me, McCaffrey is better A's pick, Harris is better C's pick, and better B takes, I don't know, Cook or Kupp or something, it's subjective depending on their projections.

Better C may be the smartest and have the best odds to win.  Better B has a system they aren't going to deviate from, and sometimes better A is going to win, maybe it's the least likely to happen but if it doesn't it pays off the best.

Edited by JE7HorseGod
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

30 minutes ago, AlexxelA said:

Is it more likely that he plays every game OR that he plays in less than half of the games?

Less than half. Every game? Yeah that’s tough. I can see 14-15 pretty realistically but 17 is a tall ask for any RB let alone an injury prone one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...