With running backs, I like to look as much at teams as players. That is, while the talent of the individual is important, his situation plays a massive role in what kind of numbers he’ll put up.
Surrounding casts matter, and scheme matters. That is, how often will they be going to a running back, and will he have decent holes to run through.
With this in mind, it makes sense to look at the kind of stats that typically flow through each team. All of the teams played 17 games last year, and it makes some sense to look at how much production they got out of the running back position in that season.
Four teams got at least 600 points out of their running backs last year: Lions, Ravens, Rams, Bills. That’s using PPR scoring. When selecting running backs who are second-string players, I in general prefer to focus on players from these kind of teams. Blake Corum, Ray Davis. These are guys where there’s some proof of concept that they could really shine should Kyren Williams and James Cook miss time with injuries.
Isiah Pacheco is the new No. 2 back in Detroit. I’m not as excited about talking him up as a Jahmyr Gibbs insurance policy.
| TEAM RUNNING BACK PRODUCTION (PPR) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Team | Run | Rec | Total |
| Detroit | 321.8 | 321.8 | 643.6 |
| Baltimore | 319.6 | 319.6 | 639.2 |
| LA Rams | 300.4 | 300.4 | 600.8 |
| Buffalo | 300.0 | 300.0 | 600.0 |
| Seattle | 296.8 | 296.8 | 593.6 |
| Atlanta | 295.2 | 295.2 | 590.4 |
| Indianapolis | 290.5 | 290.5 | 581.0 |
| Chicago | 282.2 | 282.2 | 564.4 |
| New England | 279.8 | 279.8 | 559.6 |
| Dallas | 274.6 | 274.6 | 549.2 |
| Miami | 262.6 | 262.6 | 525.2 |
| Green Bay | 249.1 | 249.1 | 498.2 |
| Washington | 246.9 | 246.9 | 493.8 |
| San Francisco | 231.9 | 231.9 | 463.8 |
| NY Giants | 230.7 | 230.7 | 461.4 |
| Denver | 228.6 | 228.6 | 457.2 |
| Jacksonville | 226.1 | 226.1 | 452.2 |
| Pittsburgh | 222.4 | 222.4 | 444.8 |
| Tampa Bay | 221.7 | 221.7 | 443.4 |
| Philadelphia | 213.3 | 213.3 | 426.6 |
| Carolina | 210.1 | 210.1 | 420.2 |
| Minnesota | 209.1 | 209.1 | 418.2 |
| Cincinnati | 198.8 | 198.8 | 397.6 |
| LA Chargers | 194.0 | 194.0 | 388.0 |
| Houston | 189.1 | 189.1 | 378.2 |
| NY Jets | 184.3 | 184.3 | 368.6 |
| Tennessee | 183.2 | 183.2 | 366.4 |
| Kansas City | 178.7 | 178.7 | 357.4 |
| Cleveland | 168.4 | 168.4 | 336.8 |
| Arizona | 158.7 | 158.7 | 317.4 |
| Las Vegas | 142.0 | 142.0 | 284.0 |
| New Orleans | 141.6 | 141.6 | 283.2 |
As long as we’ve got the numbers out, let’s also look closer as the team numbers for rushing and passing.
For rushing, I notice that four of the top 6 teams from last year were teams that ranked 8th or lower when including other players. That can be attributed to the Lions, Rams, Seahawks and Falcons not getting much rushing from the quarterback position. They tended to rely more on their running backs when running the ball.
The Giants, on the other hand, ranked 5th in rushing in general but only 15th in terms of running the ball with running backs.
In the chart below, the “points” column shows production using 6 points for each rushing touchdown and 1 point for every 10 rushing yards.
| RUSHING PRODUCTION (RB only) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rk | Team | Att | Yards | Avg | TD | Pts | All Pos |
| 1 | Detroit | 407 | 1,958 | 4.8 | 21 | 321.8 | 8 |
| 2 | Baltimore | 392 | 2,056 | 5.2 | 19 | 319.6 | 2 |
| 3 | LA Rams | 413 | 2,044 | 4.9 | 16 | 300.4 | 12 |
| 4 | Buffalo | 419 | 2,100 | 5.0 | 15 | 300.0 | 1 |
| 5 | Seattle | 439 | 1,888 | 4.3 | 18 | 296.8 | 10 |
| 6 | Atlanta | 439 | 2,052 | 4.7 | 15 | 295.2 | 13 |
| 7 | Indianapolis | 373 | 1,765 | 4.7 | 19 | 290.5 | 3 |
| 8 | Chicago | 400 | 1,922 | 4.8 | 15 | 282.2 | 4 |
| 9 | New England | 371 | 1,718 | 4.6 | 18 | 279.8 | 6 |
| 10 | Dallas | 383 | 1,786 | 4.7 | 16 | 274.6 | 11 |
| 11 | Miami | 380 | 1,846 | 4.9 | 13 | 262.6 | 17 |
| 12 | Green Bay | 386 | 1,531 | 4.0 | 16 | 249.1 | 14 |
| 13 | Washington | 345 | 1,569 | 4.5 | 15 | 246.9 | 7 |
| 14 | San Francisco | 405 | 1,599 | 3.9 | 12 | 231.9 | 21 |
| 15 | NY Giants | 396 | 1,587 | 4.0 | 12 | 230.7 | 5 |
| 16 | Denver | 354 | 1,566 | 4.4 | 12 | 228.6 | 15 |
| 17 | Jacksonville | 373 | 1,541 | 4.1 | 12 | 226.1 | 9 |
| 18 | Pittsburgh | 353 | 1,564 | 4.4 | 11 | 222.4 | 22 |
| 19 | Tampa Bay | 398 | 1,497 | 3.8 | 12 | 221.7 | 20 |
| 20 | Philadelphia | 364 | 1,593 | 4.4 | 9 | 213.3 | 16 |
| 21 | Carolina | 391 | 1,681 | 4.3 | 7 | 210.1 | 25 |
| 22 | Minnesota | 348 | 1,491 | 4.3 | 10 | 209.1 | 19 |
| 23 | Cincinnati | 334 | 1,448 | 4.3 | 9 | 198.8 | 27 |
| 24 | LA Chargers | 359 | 1,460 | 4.1 | 8 | 194.0 | 24 |
| 25 | Houston | 399 | 1,531 | 3.8 | 6 | 189.1 | 26 |
| 26 | NY Jets | 334 | 1,483 | 4.4 | 6 | 184.3 | 18 |
| 27 | Tennessee | 328 | 1,412 | 4.3 | 7 | 183.2 | 30 |
| 28 | Kansas City | 336 | 1,247 | 3.7 | 9 | 178.7 | 23 |
| 29 | Cleveland | 353 | 1,204 | 3.4 | 8 | 168.4 | 28 |
| 30 | Arizona | 292 | 1,227 | 4.2 | 6 | 158.7 | 31 |
| 31 | Las Vegas | 307 | 1,120 | 3.6 | 5 | 142.0 | 32 |
| 32 | New Orleans | 300 | 1,116 | 3.7 | 5 | 141.6 | 29 |
For those using PPR scoring, receiving production is key. You get not only the 6 points for touchdowns and 1 for every 10 receiving yards, but also an additional point for every catch.
Using PPR scoring, five of the worst six offenses for running backs are teams that folks generally are interested in – Rams, Seahawks, Eagles, Bears and Cowboys. (Washington was the worst team last year at using its running backs in the passing game.)
| RECEIVING PRODUCTION (RB only) | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rk | Team | No | Yards | Avg | TD | Pts | All Pos |
| 1 | San Francisco | 134 | 1,162 | 8.7 | 9 | 304.2 | 6 |
| 2 | Pittsburgh | 114 | 828 | 7.3 | 5 | 226.8 | 17 |
| 3 | Detroit | 101 | 808 | 8.0 | 5 | 211.8 | 3 |
| 4 | Atlanta | 93 | 916 | 9.8 | 4 | 208.6 | 23 |
| 5 | Miami | 87 | 616 | 7.1 | 5 | 178.6 | 25 |
| 6 | Denver | 87 | 614 | 7.1 | 5 | 178.4 | 8 |
| 7 | Arizona | 91 | 645 | 7.1 | 3 | 173.5 | 5 |
| 8 | Buffalo | 69 | 664 | 9.6 | 6 | 171.4 | 12 |
| 9 | Cincinnati | 87 | 533 | 6.1 | 5 | 170.3 | 4 |
| 10 | Cleveland | 95 | 621 | 6.5 | 2 | 169.1 | 29 |
| 11 | NY Giants | 78 | 646 | 8.3 | 4 | 166.6 | 22 |
| 12 | Tampa Bay | 78 | 529 | 6.8 | 4 | 154.9 | 18 |
| 13 | Las Vegas | 74 | 458 | 6.2 | 5 | 149.8 | 26 |
| 14 | Carolina | 72 | 533 | 7.4 | 4 | 149.3 | 24 |
| 15 | New England | 71 | 581 | 8.2 | 3 | 147.1 | 7 |
| 16 | Jacksonville | 56 | 425 | 7.6 | 8 | 146.5 | 9 |
| 17 | NY Jets | 66 | 602 | 9.1 | 3 | 144.2 | 32 |
| 18 | Tennessee | 78 | 470 | 6.0 | 0 | 125.0 | 27 |
| 19 | Indianapolis | 64 | 485 | 7.6 | 2 | 124.5 | 10 |
| 20 | Kansas City | 64 | 425 | 6.6 | 3 | 124.5 | 16 |
| 21 | LA Chargers | 63 | 386 | 6.1 | 3 | 119.6 | 11 |
| 22 | Green Bay | 64 | 472 | 7.4 | 1 | 117.2 | 20 |
| 23 | Baltimore | 55 | 458 | 8.3 | 2 | 112.8 | 28 |
| 24 | New Orleans | 68 | 429 | 6.3 | 0 | 110.9 | 13 |
| 25 | Houston | 54 | 385 | 7.1 | 3 | 110.5 | 14 |
| 26 | Minnesota | 61 | 370 | 6.1 | 2 | 110.0 | 31 |
| 27 | Dallas | 61 | 308 | 5.0 | 3 | 109.8 | 2 |
| 28 | Chicago | 52 | 463 | 8.9 | 1 | 104.3 | 15 |
| 29 | Philadelphia | 52 | 382 | 7.3 | 2 | 102.2 | 21 |
| 30 | Seattle | 53 | 441 | 8.3 | 0 | 97.1 | 19 |
| 31 | LA Rams | 44 | 317 | 7.2 | 3 | 93.7 | 1 |
| 32 | Washington | 42 | 332 | 7.9 | 0 | 75.2 | 30 |
—Ian Allan

