Canon

Why Zero RB Works: Quantifying Positional Injury Rates

Training camp is finally here. In a few weeks we’ll even have actual football. I’m pretty damn excited. Yet alongside all the noise and activity that accompanies this time of year there’s also a wretched, unshakable sense of impending doom. Each time I check the news I unconsciously gird my loins knowing that one of my players might have just broken his ankle, tweaked his hammy, or dislocated the majority of the fingers on his hand. It happens every year. And every year it makes me want to kick a kitten. Injuries suck. If you’ve listened to the latest Fantasyland podcast on Predictions, you know that a big part of making accurate projections is using base rates to anchor things. For instance: What is the probability that a wide receiver gets injured in a given year? What is the probability a running back gets injured? Basic stuff, really. Yet the answers are surprisingly hard to find. There are other questions: Does age play a role in injury rates? What about usage and volume; how do they affect things? And most of all for Zero RB advocates, do RBs really get injured more than WRs? And if so, how much more often? The answers might surprise you.

Subscribe to the best value in fantasy sports

You're all out of free reads for now and subscribing is the only way to make sure you don't ever miss an article.

By Josh Hermsmeyer | @friscojosh | Archive

Comments   Add comment

  1. Great article. Thanks for the hard work on this one

  2. Awesome. Thank you. I have always been a little confused with the football outsiders data. It makes sense that the injury rate is low because they are including all the RBs sitting on the sideline.

Discuss this article on the RotoViz Forums