Marvin Harrison – Peyton Manning = Keyshawn Johnson?
Posted by Chase Stuart on Monday, December 22, 2008
What would Marvin Harrison's numbers look like without Peyton Manning? Let's be clear: I don't know. You don't know. I'll never know. You'll never know. But what's the worst thing that could happen if we approach the question as logically as possible and see where it takes us?
Harrison played two seasons before Manning arrived, and they were decent enough seasons for a 1st and 2nd year wide receiver. His third year was Manning's rookie season, and Harrison played well before suffering an injury that caused him to miss four games. After that, he became Marvin Harrison™.
So how can we say how good Harrison would have been if he just had a regular old QB? For starters, let's define how good Marvin Harrison has been. Through the 2007 season, he had 1,042 receptions, 13,944 yards and 123 touchdowns. If we award 20 yards per touchdown and five yards per reception, that gives Harrison 21,614 adjusted yards in his career. Whether you love that formula or not, it gives a decent enough impression of how good Harrison has been; only Jerry Rice, Tim Brown and Cris Carter have more adjusted yards (and Harrison moved into second place this year).
The following Colts pass catchers have only played on Manning-led Colts teams: Reggie Wayne, Dallas Clark, Anthony Gonzalez, Joseph Addai and Ben Utecht; other players were so marginal that we don't care about them (I'm looking at you, Jim Finn, Ben Hartsock et al.). But while Harrison has just about only played with Peyton Manning, some other pass catchers have played with Manning and with another QB. Here's a full list, with the first column showing games played on the '98-'07 Colts and the second listing games played at any other time and place (besides 2008):
Marcus Pollard 106 77 Ken Dilger 63 93 Jerome Pathon 46 53 Brandon Stokley 41 46 Troy Walters 52 40 Edgerrin James 96 32 Marshall Faulk 16 160 Torrance Small 16 117 Qadry Ismail 14 110 Terrence Wilkins 41 13 Lamont Warren 12 84 Dominic Rhodes 71 9 Tony Simmons 6 38 Craig Heyward 4 145 Jermaine Wiggins 3 104 Zack Crockett 2 156 Ricky Proehl 2 242
For no particularly great reason, I'm going to draw the line between Wilkins and Ismail. Warren and Rhodes were obviously running backs, and Wilkins was really just a returner during his 13-game season with the Rams. Ismail and Small basically played full seasons with the Colts and a bunch of other seasons with other teams.
That gives us nine receivers, running backs and tight ends that played with a Manning-Colts squad and a different squad. Now how the heck do we compare them?
It is obvious that a player's age must be accounted for. I looked at the top 100 pass catchers of all time and studied their drop-off rate. After smoothing out the numbers, the table below shows my results:
21 43.6 22 61.1 23 75.0 24 85.5 25 93.0 26 97.7 27 99.9 28 100.0 29 98.2 30 94.9 31 90.3 32 84.8 33 78.6 34 72.0 35 65.4 36 59.0 37 53.1 38 48.1 39 44.3 40 41.8 41 41.2 42 39.2
In other words, the average pass catcher peaks at ages 27 and 28 -- that's when they are at 100% of their peak. At age 32, they're at 85% of their peak; at age 22, they're at 61% of their peak. Once again, you don't need to love these numbers but I think they're roughly accurate and noncontroversial. Using those numbers as a guide, we can project the number of adjusted yards for each player for each season.
Let's take Marcus Pollard as an example. At age 24, he played in 16 games. He is projected to be at 85.5% of his peak -- that gives him 13.68 adjusted games. At age 35, he played in 14 games, and we suspect he is only 65.4% of his former self; that means we'll give him 9.16 adjusted games. The table below lists all the years of Pollard's career, along with his games played * age value combination.
age year team g rec recyd rectd AdjYd Age-Game 24 1996 clt 16 6 86 1 136 13.68 25 1997 clt 16 10 116 0 166 14.87 26 1998 clt 16 24 309 4 509 15.63 27 1999 clt 16 34 374 4 624 15.99 28 2000 clt 16 30 439 3 649 16.00 29 2001 clt 16 47 739 8 1134 15.72 30 2002 clt 15 43 478 6 813 14.24 31 2003 clt 14 40 541 3 801 12.64 32 2004 clt 13 29 309 6 574 11.02 33 2005 det 16 46 516 3 806 12.57 34 2006 det 15 12 100 0 160 10.80 35 2007 sea 14 28 273 2 453 9.15 6825 162.30
That 162.30 represents the number of adjusted (for age) career games he played in -- it is the sum of all of his games played per age season times the value of that age season. That number is pretty meaningless except for the fact that it can then be compared to his career adjusted yards number. He recorded 6,825 adjusted yards in his career, and accumulated 162.30 adjusted games. That means for his career, he averaged 42 adjusted yards per adjusted game. Knowing that, we can then project his whole career:
age year team g car % proj 24 1996 clt 16 0.08 575 25 1997 clt 16 0.09 625 26 1998 clt 16 0.10 657 27 1999 clt 16 0.10 672 28 2000 clt 16 0.10 673 29 2001 clt 16 0.10 661 30 2002 clt 15 0.09 599 31 2003 clt 14 0.08 532 32 2004 clt 13 0.07 463 33 2005 det 16 0.08 529 34 2006 det 15 0.07 454 35 2007 sea 14 0.06 385 1.00 6825
This might look complicated but it's really not that bad. First we had to see how many games Pollard played at each age, since your age is correlated to your production. Then once we total his career value of games and age, we can compare it to his actual production. Then we can put in projections for what we would guess he would have each year of his career if he was a typical receiver -- notice for his career he is still at 6,825 adjusted yards.
What's the usefulness of this? Well we can compare what we would project him to do against what he actually did. Here's a look:
year team act proj diff 1996 clt 136 575 -439 1997 clt 166 625 -459 1998 clt 509 657 -148 1999 clt 624 672 - 48 2000 clt 649 673 - 24 2001 clt 1134 661 473 2002 clt 813 599 214 2003 clt 801 532 269 2004 clt 574 463 111 2005 det 806 529 277 2006 det 160 454 -294 2007 sea 453 385 68 6825 6825 0
I've bolded the seasons where he played without Peyton Manning. For his career he outperformed his projection by 847 adjusted yards when he played with Manning and underperformed his projection by 847 yards when he didn't play with Manning. Is that mildly interesting?
Here's another way to look at it: Pollard played 38% of his adjusted career without Manning and 62% with Manning. He had 1721 adjusted yards without Manning and 5104 adjusted yards with Manning. Using those ratios, we can say that (at least according to this method of estimating) while Pollard had 6825 adjusted yards in his real career, if he played 100% of his career with Manning he'd have 8183 adjusted yards and if he played 0% of his career with Manning he'd have adjusted 4574 yards.
That's just Marcus Pollard, though. Here's how the other players have done:
AY car AY w M PT w M AY wo M PT wo M 100% w M 100% wo M Factor Edgerrin James 5567 4839 71% 728 29% 6861 2470 1.78 Marcus Pollard 6825 5104 62% 1721 38% 8183 4574 0.79 Brandon Stokley 5199 2911 49% 2288 51% 5922 4500 0.32 Jerome Pathon 4950 2460 43% 2490 57% 5733 4362 0.31 Marshall Faulk 11430 1418 10% 10012 90% 14211 11122 0.28 Troy Walters 1825 1285 59% 540 41% 2192 1305 0.68 Torrance Small 6952 1046 13% 5906 87% 7851 6814 0.15 Qadry Ismail 7562 742 11% 6820 89% 6984 7631 -0.08 Ken Dilger 6359 2553 43% 3806 57% 5934 6680 -0.11 Average 63869 49457 0.29
From left to right, those columns are adjusted yards career, adjusted yards with Manning, playing time (as a percentage of career) with Manning, adjusted yards without Manning, playing time (as a percentage of career) without Manning, the pro-rated careers if they were spent 100% with Manning, and the pro-rated careers if they were spent 100% without Manning. On average, the players would have a 29% increase in adjusted yards for their career if they spent their whole careers with Manning.
So back to Harrison. He spent the first 18% of his career (ignoring '08) without Manning and totaled 2667 adjusted yards. Over the remaining 82% of his career he had 18,947 adjusted yards; if we reduce that by 29%, he'd have 13,426 adjusted yards. That would give him 16,119 adjusted yards for his pre-2008 career. That would place him between a couple of Jets -- Don Maynard and Keyshawn Johnson -- on the career list. That's a pretty big drop.
Of course we should remember what "without Manning" means. Here it means with an average of the other QBs all the other pass catchers played with. Here's a list of the main QBs each of them played with in their non-Manning years. Judge for yourself how representative of "average" they are:
Troy Walters Matt Leinart Troy Walters Jon Kitna Troy Walters Daunte Culpepper Torrance Small Jim Everett Torrance Small Doug Pederson Torrance Small Jim Everett Torrance Small Donovan McNabb Torrance Small Jim Everett Torrance Small Tony Banks Torrance Small Bobby Hebert Torrance Small Wade Wilson Torrance Small Tom Brady Qadry Ismail Elvis Grbac Qadry Ismail Tony Banks Qadry Ismail Warren Moon Qadry Ismail Tony Banks Qadry Ismail Warren Moon Qadry Ismail Brad Johnson Qadry Ismail Jim McMahon Marshall Faulk Kurt Warner Marshall Faulk Kurt Warner Marshall Faulk Kurt Warner Marshall Faulk Marc Bulger Marshall Faulk Marc Bulger Marshall Faulk Marc Bulger Marshall Faulk Marc Bulger Marshall Faulk Jim Harbaugh Marshall Faulk Jim Harbaugh Marshall Faulk Jim Harbaugh Marshall Faulk Jim Harbaugh Marcus Pollard Joey Harrington Marcus Pollard Matt Hasselbeck Marcus Pollard Jon Kitna Marcus Pollard Jim Harbaugh Marcus Pollard Jim Harbaugh Ken Dilger Brian Griese Ken Dilger Brad Johnson Ken Dilger Brad Johnson Ken Dilger Jim Harbaugh Ken Dilger Jim Harbaugh Ken Dilger Jim Harbaugh Jerome Pathon Aaron Brooks Jerome Pathon Aaron Brooks Jerome Pathon Aaron Brooks Jerome Pathon Michael Vick Edgerrin James Matt Leinart Edgerrin James Kurt Warner Brandon Stokley Jay Cutler Brandon Stokley Jeff Blake Brandon Stokley Elvis Grbac Brandon Stokley Tony Banks Brandon Stokley Tony Banks
So what do you think? With Peyton Manning, Harrison's career stats make him one of the top three or four receivers in modern history. Without Peyton Manning, is he just one of the top three or four WRs from his draft class?
This entry was posted on Monday, December 22nd, 2008 at 10:41 PM and filed under History, Insane ideas, Statgeekery. Follow comments here with the RSS 2.0 feed. Skip to the end and leave a response. Trackbacks are closed.
I have one minor quibble with this analysis, which otherwise I think is very interesting and certainly one of the better "what if so-and-so didn't have some superstar as his teammate" things I've seen. The quibble is with using the top 100 pass catchers of all time to create your aging curve. I think you are selecting receivers(and not RBs, who age worse) who aged particularly well, and consequently I think your curve is too flat, particularly out into the 30s. For instance, claiming that Qadry Ismail or Dominic Rhodes should have produced at 78% of their value at age 33 seems a bit high. I get that you are accounting for this by multiplying by games played(so the age 33 season makes no difference at all for Ismail and probably won't for Rhodes either), but there still seems something a bit too flat about that aging curve. Perhaps using the top 200, or even an entirely random sampling of receivers with more than 50 receptions or something.
That said, even if the curve is off a little bit, it's not like it hurts the analysis much as long as you end up with more or less the same number of guys at the beginning of their careers and the end of their careers.
Anyhow, minor and possibly irrelevant quibbles aside, well done, and I'd love to see this for some other famous WRs...Art Monk, Torry Holt, Michael Irvin, and Andre Reed all come to mind.
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 2:40 am | PermalinkI am sure that I read it here at one time, but I had forgotten how good that class of WR's is/was. TEN!! receivers with over 500 catches. I would be interested to find out how that compares with other classes of WR's (although I am sure that the 500 receptions cutoff would leave out any class of WR's before, say, 1980.)
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 11:10 am | PermalinkThere's one big difference between Harrison & Johnson that you didn't account for. Harrison had speed and Johnson didn't. Johnson was really no more than a glorified possesion receiver.
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 1:30 pm | PermalinkI love Payton from his UT days but to tell the truth I won't necessaryly agree with your "Marvin Harrison - Peyton Manning = Keyshawn Johnson" analysis because it's not fare to Marvin. As much as Payton makes Marvin looks good, thr reverse is the same. If you look at Rice-Montana and Rice-Young combos, you would see what I'm tring to say. I think Payton is and should be the best QB ever, but Marvin is definitely more than "Robin" to Payton the "Batman"!
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 2:20 pm | PermalinkThat was a fascinating analysis. I loved reading it, although I do agree with the comment about how Harrison probably also made Peyton better. Sometimes there are intangibles between QBs and WRs that are hard to quantify. Still, an excellent analysis that really enjoyed reading.
I also would be interested in seeing something similar with other WRs, particularly Torry Holt, since he went to my alma mater.
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 3:02 pm | PermalinkAlso, an analysis like this would interesting for Hines Ward. Many Steelers fans believe that he would have put up much higher receiving numbers if not for being on such a run-heavy offense for his entire career (minus the couple of Tommy Maddox years).
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 3:06 pm | PermalinkI have a lot of trouble with this post because while Peyton and Marvin are great players they are more importantly (in terms of this discussion) centerpieces of an overall amazing offense. I think this skews the comparison that you use with the Colt players that went on to play with other teams. With the exception of Faulk, every player that left the Colts not only played with a worse QB but they also saw the talent of the total offense drop. Stokely no longer played between Harrison and Wayne, Edge no longer had the passing attack to keep a defense honest, yada yada yada. Of course that still all comes back to Manning but the Colt offense as a whole has been so outstanding that you have to account for the value that playing around other great players, not just playing with Peyton, has on any individual.
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 4:47 pm | PermalinkFirst of all: Great piece!
A bit off the topic here, but why do you award 5 yards pr. rec in AY? I mean 5 yards gives a pretty big boost to your yards/rec. I don't see how a catch for 0 yards, gives you the right to get the 5-yard boost.
Nice split with Pollards numbers.. +/- 847!
And one last request: If this is the beginning of a series, like ABW hopes, then i would be nice if you didn't give the answer in the beginning and just named it "Harrison - Manning = ?" or something like that.
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 6:05 pm | PermalinkAlso, without looking any numbers up, wasn't Mannings '98 season pretty bad? Thats of course understandable for a rookie, but it seems wrong to include '98 as a "Manning influenced"-season, no?
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 6:09 pm | PermalinkThe dropoff curve is what jumps at me. Because every time I've looked at a player lately, (eg Bartkowski, Grbac) their decline was sudden. Usually a knee injury. Except it's hard to find what happened. It's like there's a code of silence, or at least a taboo about talking about injuries. Am I missing something here?
Posted on 23-Dec-08 at 7:38 pm | PermalinkI would note that all those other players ALSO played the rest of their careers without Marvin Harrison drawing double coverage for them.
Might part of the drop in production be due to the fact that they lost both a HoF QB AND a HoF WR to help them out? Can you quantify the 'Harrison Factor' in the drop in production once players leave Indy?
I saw almost every game of Harrison's career. He passes the 'eye ball test'. He was amazing.
Posted on 24-Dec-08 at 2:52 pm | PermalinkI think there's a mistake in your calculations. If playing with Manning gives someone a 29% bonus, then to correct for that you should divide with-Manning totals by 1.29 rather than subtracting 29% of them. Harrison should get credit for 14,671 adjusted yards for his years with Manning, because a player who got 14,671 yards without Manning would be expected to get 1.29 x 14,671 = 18,947 yards with Manning. That would give Harrison 17,338 total adjusted yards.
Also, it doesn't seem right to include RBs in the adjustment factor for a WR. Excluding James & Faulk, the Manning bonus drops to only 19%, and Harrison's adjusted yardage total goes up to 18,545 (15,878 with Manning and 2,667 without). Excluding TEs as well would increase that total a bit more, up to 18,925.
Posted on 24-Dec-08 at 4:11 pm | PermalinkI think you're right, Vince. Lemme think this over a bit.
Posted on 24-Dec-08 at 5:04 pm | PermalinkManning is certainly a boost to Harrison, but if you're removing the QB-factor from the equation, wouldn't you have to do that to the other WR's in order to make a fair comparison? Rice was phenomenal but he played with two HOF'ers, etc. I suppose once one creates a reasonably flexible algorithm for measuring the impact of a QB, one could also attempt to account for bad QBs... Do players who played with Tim Couch get bonus points to their production?
Posted on 28-Dec-08 at 8:31 pm | Permalink