All-Pros and Expectations

First off, congrats to Brian Westbrook for being named to the AP's All-Pro team.  That's a huge honor, and one he richly deserves.  Good on ya, mate, as our Aussie friends might say.

Secondly, I just want to point out something interesting that I noticed a couple of weeks ago.  Think for just a moment about how people are telling the story of Brian's career.  I bet for most people it goes something like this:

2002 -- Rookie with speed from a small school.
2003-2005 -- Dangerous return man and change of pace back.
2006 -- Still not really an "every down back" although the Eagles had no choice but to feed him the ball continuously when Garcia took over the team down the stretch, when he produced.
2007 -- All-Pro and arguably the top back in the league.

Maybe you'd quibble with some of the details, but especially for folks outside Philadelphia, I think this is the general mindset.  He started to get a bit more attention last year because of his fantasy numbers, but even so I don't think he would have been included in many discussions of the league's five best running backs.

So here's what's interesting.  Take a look at his career stats:

Look how similar the 2006 and 2007 seasons are.  In fact, you could even argue that on a per-touch basis, Brian was a little better last year.  And the thing that really depressed his 2006 stats was that last game against Atlanta, when he made a token appearance before leaving once the result didn't matter.  Give him another 20 rushes and five catches in that game and the years would have looked almost identical.

I wrote something a few months ago about how Westbrook "made the leap" this year.  I was probably one of 100 people to do so at some point this season. 

We were all wrong.  He did it last year. 

(And that should be some solace to the "underrated and unknown" Trent Cole.)

Comments

[bigmyc]

Well, I'd like to say that he arrived even longer ago than that. Skill-wise, he's always had the ability to shoulder the load...it's just that his "shoulder" would give out while the rest of him would churn away.

I think as early as '04 Westbrook was in the elite as a playmaker. As an every down back, '05 clearly showed he was up for it. He's just been at the top of the list for the last three years or so....and that's what he does.

There isn't a more dangerous football player running the ball for any team.

[Andrew]

Westbrook made the leap in 2004, not 2006.

Remember, his 2004 numbers were depressed by not playing in Weeks 16 and 17, missing Week 8 with a rib injury and playing limited in Week 9.

Look at his stats on a rolling 16 game basis so s to eliminate bias from missed games.

Year Yards from Scrimmage TDs Touches
04 Wk1-SB 1871 yards 11 310 220ru/90re
06 Wk1-Wild 2069 yards 12 339 260ru/79re
07 06Div-Wk17 2225 yards 14 384 291ru/93re

Looked at week-by-week, Westbrook continued to play at the 2004 level through Week 10 of 2006.

Since Week 11 of 2006 he's been at 1900+ yards, 10+ touchdowns, and 330+ touches. Going in to Week 11, it wasn't so much that Westbrook's touches jumped dramatically with McNabb's injury, but that he replaced the Week 5 2005 Cowboys stinker of a game with his impressive game against the Titans

The other factor is that his yards per rush went up dramatically between 2005 and 2006 by replacing Artis Hicks and Hank Fraley with Todd Herremanns and Jamaal Jackson. Westbrook was actually below 3.5 yards per rush over the 8 game stretch to start 2005, but saw that rise to 5 yards per rush as soon as Jackson became the starting center in Week 10 of 2005 and Herremans entered the lineup in Week 11 of 2005. Westbrook was 95 rushes for 328 yards in the first 8 weeks of 2005. He was 116 rushes for 578 yards in the 8 games from Week 10 2005 to Week 5 2006, which includes his 9 for 17 effort against Seattle where he injured his foot.

One other note, more touches for Westbrook hasn't made him more productive per touch. He's still a 1 touchdown for every 20-30 touches player, and he still produces about 6 yards per touch, as he has done throughout his career. His one weak stretch of running, in early 2005 coincided with his best stretch of receiving, when he went over 1000 yards in 16 games in the stretch from Week 10 2004 to Week 11 2005, and posted an average of over 10.3 yards per reception on 94-95 receptions.

[Me]

It's a solid argument, but there's been a big jump between the '04 and '06-'07 Westbrook just in terms of per-game stats AND carries. Even if you give him credit for the missed games, there's a big difference between a 13 carry guy and an 18 carry guy. His increased durability is one of the factors that took him from "really good" to "great."

There are lots of other mitigating factors (better line now, but no TO / healthy tight end), so I'm not sure we can tease out all the variables. But at the end of the day, Westbrook is putting up even better numbers the last two years despite the fact that every defense in the league knows to stop the Eagles you just have to stop Westbrook.

[Andrew]

Excluding the Pittsburgh game, Westbrook had 214 carries in 15 games in 2004

He had 259 in 15 excluding Atlanta in 2006, and he had 284 from the Divisonal in Norlins to the return to the Dome in 07.

That's 14.3, 17.3, 18.9 carries per game. A jump of 4-5 carries per game is significant, and its the difference between running for 1000 yards and running for 1300-1400.

OTOH, its hard to argue with 1871 yards from scrimmage in 16 games in 2004 as being all-star level. In 2004, had that been his regular season tally from playing 16 games for a more mediocre team that couldn't rest its starters, he'd have been 4th in the league.

The main reason he is putting up better numbers now is the 5 additional carries per game (add 350 yards to total), and playing the full season on a more mediocre team, plus a gain in yards per rush of about 0.3 yards from 2004 because of better blocking (add 85 yards to total).