How much should we care about beat speculation?

Bijan vs. Breece, and some other thoughts about fantasy analysis

I’ve had a personal matter come up that’s shifted my schedule around a little this week, and the main thing is I won’t be able to hit on a mailbag this morning like I’d been planning to. I’d also mentioned a Draftathon with Shawn Siegele on YouTube today, but that’s been postponed until Friday. Still come join us for that then!

I also won’t be able to update the ranks through today, and that’s an issue as it relates to cuts happening around the league. Please keep that in mind if you’re drafting today.

Today, I want to answer a question I got on Twitter, where I sent a huge clarification that was buried in the comments on a post about Bijan Robinson and Breece Hall, so I wanted to bring it here (the original post noted that while we often talk about Breece being better than Bijan, Bijan had better MTF/Touch and YACo/Att numbers in all three of his collegiate seasons than Breece’s best season in either metric, which I think is still very relevant to Bijan’s long-term upside optimism). Both the question and the answer are quite a bit longer than a normal tweet.

Hey man, I’m sure you’re tired of talking about this, but I’ve read every word you’ve written about the Bijan V Breece take and I’m still trying to clarify exactly what’s leading you to Bijan over Breece and if I’m understanding it correctly.

In the rb fades and targets article you mentioned Jets pace of play and high profile backups.

I will gladly concede pace, think it makes sense.

- In terms of high profile backup, wouldn’t [Tyler Allgeier] as a thousand yard rusher as a rookie, and the guy beats speculate being a 50/50 in the red zone qualify as that as much as a rookie we like?

With that in mind, do you view it as a higher percentage chance we see Bijan’s talent match/exceed Breece’s in accordance with college performance, and factoring in more plays that gets him there?

I will layout my Breece over Bijan take for context as to why I’m asking

- Rodgers has historically targeted RBs at a higher rate than Kirk

- I think Breece will own a higher ADOT than Bijan even if targets are the same

- I think Breece will be higher on the target pecking order than Bijan

That’s my case. Would love to get more insight from you on this, have a draft today and picking between the 2!

(Before I get to my answer, need to note that in the original tweet, I’d been clear that I don’t actually view Bijan as more talented than Breece, as my stat might imply. Mostly I am sharing this because it’s maybe the first time I explained an opinion I hold about beat speculation, and how some questions are framed.)

I think the notes you offer about Breece in the passing game are valid.

The Allgeier stuff is a little odd to me. First, everyone looks past last year, when it's our most recent data. There are some caveats with it. Second, he's a former 5th-round pick from a past regime. We love him in the FF community and the new coaching staff has talked him up. But it would be very unsurprising if he was a run-of-the-mill No. 2 RB this year. A lot of my replies to these tweets referenced Allgeier as the deciding point between these two and I guess I'm looking at Braelon [Allen] way more that way, if either backup is that. This regime drafted [Israel] Abanikanda and signed Dalvin [Cook] last year, then drafted two more RBs this year. Their actions tell us they have been looking for a complement to Breece, and they appear to have found a stud.

The beat speculation you cite is just that, speculation. The Rams' RB usage in the past has been massive; doesn't mean Zac Robinson is going to do the same, but they do have a Year 2 former top-10 pick with way more organizational investment behind him than the backup Day 3 guy. Draft capital matters this early in careers; the Steelers were treating Najee [Harris] like a Year 2 workhorse when he was clearly worse than Warren.

If you watch beat speculation closely, a ton of it tends to just restate the way the workload split the year prior. They aren't fantasy analysts, they are journalists covering the team. The statistical stuff is usually just a guess, and they tend to default to what they saw the year prior. That's not a criticism of them; it's a criticism of how it's read into by fantasy players, because it becomes double counting. The Bijan case is straightforwardly that he has a better chance to dominate his backfield. Rams RBs have been so, so valuable since McVay took over for that exact reason.

[This is where I ended this comment, but I just want to emphasize this thing about beat speculation because it’s so crucial — I care about the beat reports that match coachspeak and other commentary that suggests players look great, or things like that, because typically if everyone is saying a guy looks amazing, it’s because he actually looks amazing, and teams want to use guys who look amazing in that way. I also care when beats have a strong read on where someone sits on the depth chart.

But be realistic about answers when beats are asked questions like to split how big a workload might be. They get hammered with these questions, and then people take the answers as if they have spent their whole summers pouring over data on Zac Robinson’s coaching history and how Sean McVay has always treated RBs within his scheme, or how draft capital tends to influence early-career opportunity. There’s this absurd appeal to authority where people expect beat reporters to have all the same information that’s been discussed in the fantasy space, and know every past trend and piece of information, and that their opinion is informed by that, when they are just trying to do their job. And in the past, many beat reporters would show disdain for these questions, but part of their job is to write what people want to read (get clicks, but I don’t mean that in a derogatory way; it’s the job) so many now embrace these questions because they are what people want and they are easy wins as far as content generation.

None of this is a criticism of beat reporters, to emphasize that again. It sounds like I’m saying they don’t know anything, but I very much value and care about their work. I need to be clear that my issue is the question assumes I don’t know anything. To the extent the question was actually trying to figure out my perspective, I want to give a genuine answer, and I just have to emphasize this is entirely an own goal. The question I got assumes a 50/50 red zone split based on a beat report and then works from there. I’m not saying that’s not possible, but my work is strongly researched, too, so this isn’t me criticizing the reporter’s opinion, but rather wondering why I’m asked to ignore my own research, which I will stand on as being more relevant in this case (e.g. scheme RB usage, draft capital data that relates to players like Bijan, et al).

This happens in so many questions. “Hey Ben, I’m making these assumptions, now answer why your analysis doesn’t fit my conclusion?” I’m not complaining, but because I’m a fantasy analyst, and because there are many fantasy analysts who don’t research their work well, I’m constantly asked to answer questions that are structured this way. If you think about it, I do think you’ll understand it’s pretty unfair to someone who treats fantasy analysis like a profession and is as thorough with it as I am (and has results that back the process up). What other field would you go to an expert in the field with the premise they need to defend their expert opinion against reporter speculation? And just me asking that will cause many to recoil with the old, “You’re a fantasy analyst, get over yourself.” But I take my job seriously, as silly as it is.

So my actual immediate response to the question was I don’t agree with the premise. I thought it went awry as soon as I read the flawed assumption, that my analysis would reject.]

---

Until next time!