"Have you seen his legs? They look like tree trunks. I would never want to tackle that guy."
-- Falcons wide receiver Roddy White on Michael Turner's legs
over 2 years ago
orang3b
8 comments
0 recs |
Comments
That's our Touchdown Vampire!
Sign up for a free account today to join the discussion about all things Atlanta Falcons!
no kidding
best break tackle of any back in the NFL. This curse of 370 nonsense is a joke. Turner looks unbreakable.
Not sure why he doesn’t get the respect he deserves (he deserves to be called the best back in the league).
Yup, I said it. AP has the best offensive line out. He can break one for 75 but he can also get stuffed for less than 3 yards 8 times in a row.
by nathan rothschild on Sep 2, 2009 1:11 PM EDT reply actions
Well,
For as much as I love Football Outsiders, I don’t think I’m quite 100% on board with the Curse of 370 (at least not just for the reason they say: increased injury risk because of over-use). And 370 is not some magic number – AP would be “at risk” with his 363 carries, too.
On average, running backs with 300 to 369 carries and no postseason appearance will see their total rushing yardage decline by 15 percent the following year and their yards per carry decline by two percent. The average running back with 370 or more regular-season carries, or 390 including the postseason, will see their rushing yardage decline by 35 percent, and their yards per carry decline by eight percent.
I’m certain Turner’s numbers are going to decline some. Sam Baker was the only O-Lineman to miss any time, and Todd Weiner was great while he was in at LT. Detroit, Kansas City, Denver, and St Louis were 4 of the 5 worst defenses (at least by DVOA), and they don’t play a single one of them this season. But I don’t think his possible decline will necessarily come because of injury (…knock on wood).
Also
You can’t just look at carries. You also have to include receptions. Being tackled is no different regardless of how you ended up with the ball in your hands. So sure, Turner had over 370 carries, but he didn’t have the most touches. AP had more touches than Turner, yet there’s not a lot of noise about him being overused.
"This is America, if we can’t self-righteously look down on others and blame them for our faults, the commies win."-----Cormican on Bleeding Green Nation w/r/t fans overreacting to the Eagles signing of Michael Vick
Actually,
Their analysis considered that, but the data showed receptions didn’t make much of a difference. For example, a guy like LaDainian Tomlinson, who routinely got ~330 carries and 50+ receptions didn’t have the decline that a guy like Shaun Alexander did after his 370 carries, plus 15 receptions in 2005 (and they correctly predicted Alexander would decline, but LDT would keep cruising along).
They basically shrugged their shoulders and said “I don’t know why it works like this, but it does”…
See, now this makes more sense to me:
Maybe I just needed somebody over there to explain it to me better…
Curses: One more fantasy observation. Our “Curse of 370” theory of running back overuse gets a lot of press, which means it attracts a lot of criticism. Most of the criticism is of the knee-jerk variety: people who just hear the slogan “Curse of 370” and think that we’re naïve about the forces, like regression to the mean, that affect a running back’s statistics. Other critics think that the term Curse of 370 is a little too pat, which it is: If you evaluate complicated ideas based simply on slogans, headlines, and sound bites, you’ll find the whole world pretty pat.
Michael Turner is the current 370 poster boy and curse skeptics are predicting a banner year for him. He’s ranked in the top five by nearly every fantasy service, and the only draft I’ve seen him slip out of the top five in was the Football Outsiders office draft. (Results to be published later today!) I’ve read a few “never mind the silly curse” remarks about Turner around the Internet, which warms my heart, because it means the writer is reacting to our research.
If you don’t believe the Curse of 370, think it’s sloppy research or that our puny stats can’t measure the heart of a competitor, fine. But are you sure you want to make Turner your object lesson? A player who had one great year on a worst-to-first Cinderella team? A player with a great (though currently injured) backup in Jerious Norwood? A running back with no receiving value, which will take him out of some games when the Falcons fall behind? A player whose team acquired Tony Gonzalez, a great goal-line receiver who could leech five touchdowns from Turner just by being himself?
Our projections for Turner hover around 1,200 rushing yards and 10 touchdowns, depending on which version of KUBIAK you download. We don’t predict that his leg will fall off from overuse. We don’t think he’ll retire in October. We think the Falcons offense will decline, that Matt Ryan will throw more passes, that Gonzo will take away some goal-line touchdowns, and yes, that Turner will be a little less effective. Put them all together and his numbers will drop significantly. It’s not voodoo. It’s not junk science. It’s common sense. Ignore it at your peril.
- FO’s Mike Tanier, from his Walkthrough column
I will ignore it at my own peril
Mike Tanier, you vile numbermancer!
Sign up for a free account today to join the discussion about all things Atlanta Falcons!
if our defense continues to play like they did in preseason
the Falcons offense will be stacked with nothing but Fantasy candy…
It’s a tough card to call, but I don’t think having Tony Gonzalez will decrease Turner’s usage very much. I think it is quite the contrary, in that Turner is still primary, and Gonzalez will be the safety valve.
I’m in the “let’s wait and see stage”
know what you believe in and why you believe in it


















