The Running Back Dead Zone
I never intended for the past few newsletters to go down a path talking all about running backs, but I don’t mind it at all. Every year fantasy football advice is filled with player takes — target player A because of reason X, fade player B because of reason Y. I’ve always wanted this newsletter to go a different direction. There will always be hits and misses with player takes because football is filled with variance. But if that’s all the game is, then the luckiest person would win.
Ok yeah, obviously luck is still a big part of the game. Understanding trends, and identifying those trends before they’re clear to the wider fantasy masses is what moves the needle, though. I believe that’s how to become a consistently successful fantasy manager.
There have been several trends like that over the years and they work extremely well. That is until people start to catch on. The late-round QB strategy was one. The running back dead zone was another. I’m working on a post about elite TE, but I think that could be the next one.
I introduced the the RB dead zone in the last newsletter. That would be a good place to start if you didn’t read it. That post was focused on looking at breakout candidates, though, so I want to analyze the dead zone a little deeper here.
Revisiting the dead zone
In the past I’ve compared a player’s draft position to where he finished. For example, Josh Jacobs was drafted as the RB7 and he finished as the RB23, so I’d say he underperformed ADP. But that lacks the context that he only played 13 games, so his 13.9 PPG is only 1.2 PPG off where the RB7, Joe Mixon, finished. So then 15.1 PPG (13.9 + 1.2) would be his “expected finish.” He still underperformed, but not as much as RB23 would suggest.
With that out of the way, I want to revisit the idea of the dead zone. Like I said, these trends work until people catch on. And while the dead zone isn’t new, it seems like managers still don’t understand it. Maybe it’s because of bad advice, I don’t really know.
The 2023 dead zone, at least as I’ve defined it (RB15-RB36), actually finished 0.3 PPG above expectation. Furthermore, of the 22 players in the dead zone, 12 finished above expected PPG based on ADP.
That should be expected with any large enough group of players. The PPG vs expectation as a whole should be around 0 because that’s just how it works. In order for one player to underperform, another player has to overperform. So the dead zone isn’t this group of players that are all duds.
The argument about the dead zone that got lost in translation is this — the dead zone should be avoided because the players after the dead zone perform just as well, not because the players in the dead zone are bad. These were the guys like De’Von Achane, Raheem Mostert, Jaylen Warren, Kyren Williams and Jerome Ford. They performed as well as their dead zone counterparts, but at a cheaper cost.
But if half the players in the dead zone end up playing like high-end RB2s or even low-end RB1s, and we have a way of identifying those players, then why wouldn’t we draft them? Not to mention, I brought up five handpicked players with post dead zone ADP. There are dozens of others that weren’t even worth a roster spot. It seems silly to think that RBs drafted RB36+ would perform just as well as those drafted RB15-RB36 on aggregate. To believe that, you would have to assume that the market has no idea how to value these players, which just isn’t true.
The RB rules
I think I’m just going to start calling these “the RB rules” from now on, because as it turns out, they work for finding breakouts after the dead zone too. The players I just mentioned that were post dead zone breakouts back this up. De’Von Achane, rookie. Jaylen Warren, year-two. Kyren Williams, year-two. Jerome Ford, year-two. Yes, injuries played a part in the opportunity Jerome Ford was afforded, but it’s a consistent track record nonetheless.
The last newsletter was an introduction focused on breakout candidates. This is meant to be a study on the dead zone as a whole, not just players who look to be setup for a strong 2024. Additionally, I grabbed some 2022 data to make sure we have a sample of everything being discussed (i.e. 2023 ADP did not have any dead zone rookies). Let’s take a look at the results.
Rule #1: Avoid older backs, target rookies and year-two players
+2.2 PPG vs expectation (12/44 players)
Rest of field: +0.3 PPG vs expectation (32/44 players)
This seems to be the most important rule. That’s what the data is telling us anyway.
Let’s start with the rookies, so this will be exclusively 2022 results. The 2022 dead included rookies Breece Hall and Dameon Pierce — those two both beat expectation with an average of +4.0 PPG.
I imagine we don’t often see rookies in the dead zone because they either get really good draft capital (Bijan) and are drafted as RB1s, or they don’t and it’s difficult to project volume for them.
That said, the year-two pool is much larger. In 2022 it was Travis Etienne, Elijah Mitchell and Rhamondre Stevenson. In 2023 it was Breece Hall, Kenneth Walker, Dameon Pierce, Rachaad White, James Cook, Isiah Pacheco and Brian Robinson. So we have a total of 10 players. Of the 10, 2 underperformed expectation, 1 met expectation exactly, and the other 7 exceeded expectation. The group exceeded expectation by +1.9 PPG.
So if you include Breece Hall and Dameon Pierce’s rookie seasons from 2022 to the 10 year-two dead zone backs, you get 12 players with an average +2.2 PPG over ADP expectation.
Rule #2: Target ambiguous backfields
+2.0 PPG vs expectation (17/44 players)
Rest of field: +0.3 PPG vs expectation (27/44 players)
An ambiguous backfield can be tricky to define because… well it’s ambiguous. To keep things simple, I’m assuming any team with an RB picked ahead of the dead zone has a clear starter. Any team with two backs in the dead zone I’m considering ambiguous, and any team without an RB in the first 14 nor in the dead zone is also ambiguous.
The ambiguous backfield dead zone group includes 7 players from 2022, and 10 from 2023. In total, the average PPG vs expectation for those 17 players is +2.0 PPG. If you stretch the boundaries slightly to include Kenneth Walker in 2022 (RB40), and De’Von Achane and Raheem Mostert in 2023 (RB40 & RB41) it grows to +3.2 PPG.
It should be noted that ambiguous backfields, in addition to being tricky to define, present a higher risk. This makes sense because if one player emerges from that backfield, his teammate is likely to underperform. Dalvin Cook in 2023, for example, finished -8.0 PPG vs expectation, the worst difference of anyone in the dataset.
This isn’t always the case, as displayed by Miami’s backfield in 2023 — two players can emerge at the same time. What seems important to keep in mind is that in the NYJ backfield Breece Hall emerged as a year-two back, and in Miami De’Von Achane emerged as a rookie (see rule #1).
Interestingly, the Browns and Cowboys are the 2024 version of the Dolphins, in the sense of not having a single RB in the top-36, while the Chargers also get close. The backs on these teams aren’t without their red flags, which explains their ADPs, but they’re worth paying attention to. Could rookie Kimani Vidal be this year’s De’Von Achane out in LA?
Rule #3: Target dead zone backs with high opportunity scores
+1.2 PPG vs expectation (18/44 players)
Rest of field: +0.4 PPG vs expectation (26/44 players)
Without sounding like a broken record, the idea here is simple — running backs that are involved in the passing game (especially in PPR leagues) and get touches inside the 10-yard line have a better chance of putting up monster weeks. They have more high-value opportunities, and if volume is king, high-value touch volume is KING.
I do feel the need to explain the results here, though, because this rule does seem to be less important than the first two. Oddly, in the 2022 dead zone, of the 9 players with above average opportunity scores, none of them met rule #1 and only Damien Harris met rule #2. So that’s hurting the results here. Still, +1.2 PPG is not nothing.
The 2023 year-two players with high opportunity scores — Breece Hall, Rachaad White and Isiah Pacheco… They all crushed!
Thankfully, as we saw in the last post, the 2024 dead zone is shaping up to have a couple year-two backs with high opportunity scores, and in ambiguous backfields too. Chase Brown and Tyjae Spears are starting to look pretty good!
Rule #4: Avoid incumbent perceived starters in the dead zone with rookie QBs
Players w/o rookie QB: +1.1 vs expectation (42/44 players)
Rest of field: -6.2 PPG vs expectation (2/44 players)
Based on the way QBs were drafted in the last two years, the sample here is small. In 2022, only Kenny Pickett played at least 8 games, and the Steelers didn’t have an RB in the dead zone. Though it should be noted Najee Harris did finish -4.7 PPG vs expectation that season.
Then in 2023, as mentioned in the previous post, Dameon Pierce and Miles Sanders were the two that fit this criteria. They averaged a disappointing -6.2 PPG vs expectation between them.
Although the sample is small, this rule will be especially important to keep in mind considering the strong QB class entering the league in 2024. There were six QBs drafted in the first round, and five of them have a good chance of being their team’s starter.
Interestingly, all five of those rookies have an RB in the dead zone. That means avoiding Aaron Jones (Vikings), Rhamondre Stevenson (Patriots), D’Andre Swift (Bears), Javonte Williams (Broncos) and Brian Robinson (Commanders).
Stacking rules
3 players met all 4 rules: +5.1 PPG vs expectation
11 players met 3 rules: +2.0 PPG vs expectation
32 players met 2 rules: +1.7 PPG vs expectation
The 2024 dead zone
2024 is shaping up a really good year to test the RB rules. Over the past two years we had just two dead zone rookies, three rookie QBs that started at least half of the fantasy season and three players meet each of the four rules. There’s a good chance every single one of those numbers is at least equaled this season alone. Keep in mind these ADPs will change closer to the start of the season, but as of late June 2024, here is the dead zone (highlighted in yellow) according to Underdog ADP.
Dead Zone Targets: (players that meet 3-4 rules)
Jonathon Brooks*
Jaylen Warren
Zack Moss
Tony Pollard
Trey Benson
Tyjae Spears
Chase Brown
*Technically Jonathon Brooks only meets two rules. Since he is a rookie, he does not have an opportunity score, but based on his college reception share and Rachaad White’s usage in the Dave Canales offense, I feel confident listing him here.
Dead Zone Fades: (players that meet 0-1 rules)
Kenneth Walker
Aaron Jones
Rhamondre Stevenson
Zamir White
D’Andre Swift
Javonte Williams
Devin Singletary
Brian Robinson
Final thoughts
If you look at the player archetype of the targets vs the fades you’ll start to notice something — none of the targets appear to have a locked in role as their team’s starter, whereas the fades all do. Which seems a little backwards. You would think players with higher projected volume have a better chance of producing. This could be the reason the dead zone exists.
If an RB has a locked in role as a starter then why aren’t they being drafted higher? In many cases it’s because of the offensive situation they find themselves in. Kenneth Walker and Aaron Jones are the only two fades on above average offenses according to projections, and Walker is the only one of the eight I’d consider drafting at their current ADP.
The targets in most cases have never produced over a full season. They might find themselves in good situations, but they feel risky because we’ve never seen them do it before. Remember, the market hates uncertainty. Not to mention, just zooming out a little, the NFL has demonstrated running back is a high turnover position. History has shown us these young players in murky backfields tend to outproduce their expectations.
The RB position can be tricky to navigate because you’re usually required to start at least two players there, and players like Christian McCaffrey have shown us the league winning potential when you get it right. Next time you’re on the clock, though, staring at a hole in your roster, don’t just take the first RB listed in a panic. Knowing how to approach the dead zone is key.