Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Is the Henry deal enough for Mixon?
#31
(07-16-2020, 03:01 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It would take a lot of complicate research to answer this question, but I tend to disagree.

My research is not as exact as it needs to be, but I think it is close enough to give us a good idea.  And it looks like most good RBs play well through their second contract.

I would roughly estimate that the first contract cover years 21-24.  If they get another 4 year deal then that would be for years 25-28.

Over the last decade (2010-2019) there have been 127 one thousand yard rushing seasons.  51 of them have been by RBs age 21-24.  60 of them have been by RBs age 25-28.  

28 seems to be the big "drop off year".  There have been as many 1000 yd seasons by RBs age 28 (15) as RBs age 25 or 26.  But there were only 8 by RBs age 29, and only 8 more by RBs aged 30 or older (and Frank Gore has 3 of them).

A 4 year deal (3 year extension) for Mixon has him under contract through age 27.  I feel it is pretty safe to assume a good RB will last that long.

The issue is there's been big trends in the last 5 years against paying 2nd contracts for RB's.

In '15, 7 backs ran for 1000+ yards and 4 of them were actually over the age of 25.  However, from '16-19, out of 45 1000+ yard seasons by RB's, only 11 were by RB's over the age of 25, and 5 of those came in '16. 

Currently,the "wall"for RB's is age 26.  You sign a guy to a big extension,, but he probably only has 1-2 productive years as a starter left.  That's why even a 4 year extension at $8 mil/year is a sucker's bet.
[Image: 4CV0TeR.png]
Reply/Quote





Messages In This Thread
Is the Henry deal enough for Mixon? - CJD - 07-16-2020, 11:09 AM
RE: Is the Henry deal enough for Mixon? - Whatever - 07-16-2020, 04:45 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)