How Much Weight Does YPC Have in Your Opinion?

[Runnik's Hambones]

In some conversations about RBs recently I've seen "YPC" come up quite a bit in the discussions. While a RB's YPC is important, I personally don't hold much weight on that stat as a fantasy owner. If a guy gives me 70+ yards a game on the ground I'm happy with my 7+ points from rushing, regardless how many times he carried the ball.

With that said, there are a lot more factors that I find WAY more important than YPC. For example, receptions (PPR, of course), recieving or rushing yards (more than YPR, which is the exact same argument as the one I'm raising for YPC), and the most important, TDs (recieving or rushing).

I'm just curious first how much YPC means to you as a fantasy owner, and please, take it steps further and explain exactly what the most important to least important factors are for you in regards to statistics.

 

[Cooley Cadets]

As a general rule:

Touches is a big one for me. If a team has the confidence to put the ball in a players hands the rest tends to follow.

Likewise if the player consistently gets good ypc I believe TDs, which is often times much more fickle, will follow.

 

[WesDawg]

In real football, it's an obvious indicator of efficiency and possible future performance, or decline. The exceptions to that would be a clearly inferior offensive line/passing game, or a guy who is obviously a goal-line or short-yardage specialist.

As I posted in the Forte thread, for fantasy scoring I could care less unless it's a counting stat.

 

[Runnik's Hambones]

I agree completely with you on this one Wes. It's an extremely important indicator of a player's production in the world of football. The stat says it all about a RB, and to be honest, is kind of the most important stat when evaluating a player.

For fantasy, who the hell cares? If the guy's catching the balls and is making the yards up in the air and grabbing TDs, at the goal line, or where ever, then he's got a spot on my roster.

I was just kind of shocked to hear YPC coming up on evaluating a fantasy player in the other threads. If people can shed some light on other perspectives on perhaps why that matters, then I'm all ears.

Good point Cooley about the touches though. That's an important factor as well, and perhaps may be the only reason I would listen to YPC at all fantasy wise. If a guy has a low YPC, the team may not give him a decrease in touches, which hurts me. Other than that, I don't see it's importance to me getting fantasy points.

Anyone else have thoughts?

 

[Coachnorm]

Yeah, I'm not big on it myself.

 

[Miller]

ypc is an indicator for me of future success. I don't care about it as much in season, but while looking at backs and trying to forecast their success going forward IMO it's pretty important. If a back is not effective over the long haul and suffers through a low ypc season after season they will soon see those carries decreased and someone else move in. A back need to be able to move the chains to stay on the field. If they have a sub 4 ypc, they will struggle to do this over the long haul.

Now with that said a low ypc does not mean you can not be successful over all. If will just take more things to go right for them to succeed. They will need more opportunities and will take more of a beating to get the same production another more efficient back will get with less damage.

One lower than average year does not concern me much, but a gradual decline in ypc is a red flag for me in how I view a RB going into the next season.

 

[Cooley Cadets]

In real football, it's an obvious indicator of efficiency and possible future performance, or decline.

Why limit it to only in "real" football?

 

[Cooley Cadets]

The stat says it all about a RB, and to be honest, is kind of the most important stat when evaluating a player.

I was just kind of shocked to hear YPC coming up on evaluating a fantasy player in the other threads.

I'm not clear why you use ypc to evaluate players on the field but not for fantasy potential/projections. I could see if this was a discussion about the weight given this or any other specific stat but not for simply disregarding information.

 

[Cooley Cadets]

ypc is an indicator for me of future success. I don't care about it as much in season, but while looking at backs and trying to forecast their success going forward IMO it's pretty important.

Now with that said a low ypc does not mean you can not be successful. They will need more opportunities and will take more of a beating.

One lower than average year does not concern me much, but a gradual decline in ypc is a red flag for me in how I view a RB going into the next season.

I am in agreement with you.

For example a player just breaking into the league and getting limited opportunities, the ypc provides an means of projecting his production as his role increases.

I'm taking your comment about a low ypc to mean that it is not a stat you are going to put all your emphasis on but are not going to ignore it either.

A decline in ypc is as valid a method of projecting as any other factor. Again you have to look at other possible causes but you would for any other stat.

 

[Miller]

I'm taking your comment about a low ypc to mean that it is not a stat you are going to put all your emphasis on but are not going to ignore it either.

A decline in ypc is as valid a method of projecting as any other factor. Again you have to look at other possible causes but you would for any other stat.

You got it my friend, just one piece of the puzzle.

 

[efactor]

ypc is an indicator for me of future success. I don't care about it as much in season, but while looking at backs and trying to forecast their success going forward IMO it's pretty important. If a back is not effective over the long haul and suffers through a low ypc season after season they will soon see those carries decreased and someone else move in. A back need to be able to move the chains to stay on the field. If they have a sub 4 ypc, they will struggle to do this over the long haul.

This pretty much expresses my opinion so it saves me some time on a longer post........

If you are getting a lot of carries and have a below average YPC, it may mean you're the best of a below average group of RBs and there were no better options, so they force fed you the ball and your numbers were solid due to opportunity. It also means that team will look for better options if that trend continues. In some cases, it also means they bring in a better QB who will throw the ball down the field so they don't have to rely on you as much, so your opportunity decreases and your total numbers suffer.

While not the single most important stat, it cannot be ignored and should raise a red flag if you intend on drafting this player early............

 

[WesDawg]

I'll concede a bit and fall somewhere in the middle ground here. We all know and can probably acknowledge that there is a large handful of players who are significantly more valuable in fantasy football than they are in real life, and vice versa. When you cut to the chase, aren't we all just drafting projected numbers after all?
Now with that said, if a RB consistently produces a low YPC when he's considered a "bell cow" guy and stays on the field in every situation, that could very well be an indication of his inferior skill level and may negatively affect his future role on his team.
In the context of Chicago's Matt Forte, since that is where this was first brought up, I have to file it into my "NA" cabinet since I have an incomplete body of work to pull from. Not only that, but his all-around situation has vastly improved over his rookie season, so until I fail to see an improvement in this statistic I will consider him an elite young running back.
If he repeats a 3.9 YPC this season, I'll happily revisit this topic next summer.

 

[Runnik's Hambones]

I'm not clear why you use ypc to evaluate players on the field but not for fantasy potential/projections. I could see if this was a discussion about the weight given this or any other specific stat but not for simply disregarding information.

Ok, for fantasy football potential, you and I are on the same page, thanks for bringing up that point. If it's a dynasty league for example, a YPC stat is very important in that it will allow you to sleep when selecting a back that has 4.3 YPC rather than loosing sleep over a player that has a 3.8 YPC.

On a whole though, I find that I rarely look at this stat to make my decision in redrafts or even for leagues that are PPR and/or return yards. There are simply too many ways, most of the time, for a player to get points for me, other than getting 4 yards a carry.

 

[RUBBER DUCKIE]

YPC is an important indicater for me. If the guy isn't getting it done, the team will find someone who will. BUT, there needs to be investigation as to why the YPC is what it is.

With that said, it depends if the YPC can be explained. Forte's 3.9 YPC is easily explained so I don't hold it against him.

D.Ward had a very good YPC, but I don't give him a bump in value for that. He didn't take short yardage carries which greatly effect your YPC because of Jacobs presence. Ward got to run the ball in the perfect circumstances to succeed behind a very solid run blocking line. If Ward and Jacobs switched roles, Ward's YPC would maybe get to 3 YPC and Jacobs would be 6.5+ YPC. Having Jacobs run up the middle when the D isn't expecting the run would mean he would be difficult to stop. Add no short yardage carries to kill his YPC and Jacobs would be a YPC monster. Ward's high YPC is more of a factor of his role then Ward's actual skills as a RB.

 

[DearbornDolfan]

From a fantasy perspective, I believe it only really counts in PPR leagues. If you have two players who will have one hundred yards and a TD, you obviously want the one that does so in nine or ten catches instead of four or five.

 

[ExperiencedRookie]

From a fantasy perspective, I believe it only really counts in PPR leagues. If you have two players who will have one hundred yards and a TD, you obviously want the one that does so in nine or ten catches instead of four or five.

This is a Yard Per Carry discussion bud.

 

[DearbornDolfan]

This is a Yard Per Carry discussion bud.

Shit. Sorry, I just woke up. Er, well then it matters not at all. The only concern would be wear and tear, but that's hard to predict.

 

[Phicinfan]

YPC can matter...depending on how you use it.

For me, when looking at a primary back...what I look for is # of carries and scores...and touches in the red zone. If YPC is low...was it the back's fault or a poor O-line? You can't really tell. But if I have a back that has a 3.8 ypc, but scores 12 tds and gets 1000yds...I will take him over a guy who is getting a 5.0ypc...but only 400yds total and no scores.

Where I really like to use Ypc is when I am looking at young Rbs learning a system or at the back ups. If you have a guy with a high ypc and the primary back doens't....that tells me the back up may eventually start....since he is doing more or fitting the system better.....or a young guy is really out performing the vet.

As stated by Miller I think...it is a good way to try and determine development possibilities.

 

[efactor]

YPC can matter...depending on how you use it.

For me, when looking at a primary back...what I look for is # of carries and scores...and touches in the red zone. If YPC is low...was it the back's fault or a poor O-line? You can't really tell. But if I have a back that has a 3.8 ypc, but scores 12 tds and gets 1000yds...I will take him over a guy who is getting a 5.0ypc...but only 400yds total and no scores.

In season, I think we all would look at it that way, and even in the offseason when trying to evaluate a player for next year, it wouldn't be the absolute first item to look at. However, if a player (Forte) has good numbers with a low YPC, it would at least send up a red flag. Maybe there is an explanation, but to completely ignore it, especially if you plan on using a top pick on him, is being irresponsible................

 

[ExperiencedRookie]

In season, I think we all would look at it that way, and even in the offseason when trying to evaluate a player for next year, it wouldn't be the absolute first item to look at. However, if a player (Forte) has good numbers with a low YPC, it would at least send up a red flag. Maybe there is an explanation, but to completely ignore it, especially if you plan on using a top pick on him, is being irresponsible................

It is certainly a red flag, but it's not too serious.

When YPC really grabs my attention is when a RB has a consistant drop in YPC. It is all situation as well.

If a RB goes from 5.1 to 4.6 in 1 year, it's a red flag. If you take a closer look and see that the starting Left Tackle was injured for 7 weeks, you have your explanation. If there was no change in situation from 1 year to the next you may have cause for concern, but it's still just 1 year.

If you have a RB who sees his YPC drop in 2 straight years without any major O line problems or changes, then you have a true red flag. If you can't make a solid explanation for why that average is dropping, you've got issues.

I know that this whole argument stems from the Forte talk, so I will bring it full circle. Forte's ugly YPC has a reason attached to it. Whether it be true or not, it appears to make perfect sense. The fact that we are so concerned over the YPC of a rookie RB is kind of silly. The RBs whose YPC we should be concerned about is the aging RBs who have a lot of information to sample.

1 guy I want to make a note of is LT. In 2006 his YPC was 5.2. In 2007 it was 4.7. In 2008 it was 3.8. Those of you out there who are obsessed with Forte's rookie year YPC should be eating this stat up!

Other RBs who fit this pattern :
Shaun Alexander had 5.1 in 2005, 3.6 in 2006, then 3.5 in 2007 and was finished as an NFL RB.

Edge had 4.6 in 2004, 4.2 in 2005, and then 3.4 in 2006. He never got over 4.0 again although he did have a decent season yardage wise in 07. It was the end of his relevence.

Warrick Dunn had 5.1 in 2005, 4.0 in 2006, and 3.2 in 2007. Although he still played in 08, he was total junk.

Ahman Green went from 5.3 in 2003 to 4.5 in 2004 to 3.3 in 2005 and never returned to elite status.

Marshall Faulk went from 5.3 in 2001 to 4.5 in 2002 to 3.9 in 2003 and became a fantasy football nobody.

These are the cases where YPC really matters. For those of you who are doubters I challenge you to find a RB who saw his YPC drop by 0.5 in 2 consecutive years who still found fantasy success following that drop.