Snap Percentages Analysis (1 Viewer)

[duaneok66]

I haven't seen a thread devoted to this, so I will start one. Everyone talks targets, and those are important, but I like seeing how often guys are on the field.

These are all season to date snapshots taken from footballoutsiders.com

For example

BAL TE

Pitta 67%

Dickson 58%

Obviously Pitta is on the field 2/3 of the time, but you compare it to guys like Gronkowski (99%) and there is no comparison. Dickson is on the field enough to stunt Pitta's fantasy growth.

 

[duaneok66]

How about Indy's WRs??

D Avery 97%

R Wayne 90%

of course Wayne us the #1 there, but it's hard to discount a guy that is on the field more than Reggie.

 

[SameSongNDance]

I haven't seen a thread devoted to this, so I will start one. Everyone talks targets, and those are important, but I like seeing how often guys are on the field.These are all week 3 snapshots taken from footballoutsiders.comFor exampleBAL TEPitta 67%Dickson 58%Obviously Pitta is on the field 2/3 of the time, but you compare it to guys like Gronkowski (99%) and there is no comparison. Dickson is on the field enough to stunt Pitta's fantasy growth.For

When you put it into perspective, it's amazing that he leads TEs in targets (30) and is tied for second with RZ targets (6). I'm assuming Dickson is the superior blocker.As for some other interesting trends I guess..Hawkins is STILL only on the field for 50% of the snaps.Jon Baldwin's snaps saw a 20% increase from weeks 1-2 and a 10% increase from weeks 2-3. Breaston, who saw 50 snaps last week is now dealing with a knee injury. I think the time to scoop him up is now.Ashlon Jeffry's snap % has increased by 10% every week since week 1.Cecil shorts doesn't see the field even though he's the most productive WR on that team.

 

[duaneok66]

Here are the Steelers:

A Brown 80%

M Wallace 79%

E Sanders 68%

that is about as high as you're going to get for a third receiver - I think that fact alone makes Sanders worthy of picking up.

 

[duaneok66]

I haven't seen a thread devoted to this, so I will start one. Everyone talks targets, and those are important, but I like seeing how often guys are on the field.These are all week 3 snapshots taken from footballoutsiders.comFor exampleBAL TEPitta 67%Dickson 58%Obviously Pitta is on the field 2/3 of the time, but you compare it to guys like Gronkowski (99%) and there is no comparison. Dickson is on the field enough to stunt Pitta's fantasy growth.For

When you put it into perspective, it's amazing that he leads TEs in targets (30) and is tied for second with RZ targets (6). I'm assuming Dickson is the superior blocker.As for some other interesting trends I guess..Hawkins is STILL only on the field for 50% of the snaps.Jon Baldwin's snaps saw a 20% increase from weeks 1-2 and a 10% increase from weeks 2-3. Breaston, who saw 50 snaps last week is now dealing with a knee injury. I think the time to scoop him up is now.Ashlon Jeffry's snap % has increased by 10% every week since week 1.Cecil shorts doesn't see the field even though he's the most productive WR on that team.

Blackmon 87%Robinson 64%Thomas 42%Elliot 25%Shorts 24%There is no way I could add Shorts based on this - so we are in agreement.

 

[duaneok66]

Tennessee Week 3 only (Britt's injury makes it better to drop out week 1 and ignore week 2 for the time being)

N Washington 92%

K Wright 75%

K Britt 59%

D Williams 46%

Washington seems worthy of a roster spot regardless of Britt's health.

 

[Papa Georgio]

Good stuff in here. Thanks guys

 

[cvnpoka]

I haven't seen a thread devoted to this, so I will start one. Everyone talks targets, and those are important, but I like seeing how often guys are on the field.These are all season to date snapshots taken from footballoutsiders.comFor exampleBAL TEPitta 67%Dickson 58%Obviously Pitta is on the field 2/3 of the time, but you compare it to guys like Gronkowski (99%) and there is no comparison. Dickson is on the field enough to stunt Pitta's fantasy growth.

need to see the percentage of passing snaps he plays. who cares if he is in on running downs? moreover, what is the percentage of passing plays that he runs a route? again, obv its useless if he is blocking. so i wouldnt read too much into te snaps in particular. id say targets matter a more.

 

[JShare87]

Can someone tell me Jimmy Ghrams snap percentage for Sunday it seemed he was off the field a lot.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Can someone tell me Jimmy Ghrams snap percentage for Sunday it seemed he was off the field a lot.

Good observation, this site, says he was in on 60% of plays last week.So, Graham was in for 79% of snaps in week 1, 68% of snaps in week 2 and 60% of snaps last week. Can someone shed some light on this?

Also, for the record, the new way the snap count stats are set up is totally bogus. It was much easier to find what I needed before. I liked being able to compare a full teams snap count % in one go, now I can only see one player at a time.

 

[cpd90]

Tennessee Week 3 only (Britt's injury makes it better to drop out week 1 and ignore week 2 for the time being)N Washington 92%K Wright 75%K Britt 59%D Williams 46%Washington seems worthy of a roster spot regardless of Britt's health.

Don't forget: Britt was still limited in the type of routes that he was allowed to run in this game. Perhaps he will see the field more when his role becomes more diversified, though it is possible that his ankle injury will further slow that process.Note - I am not disagreeing that Nate Washington is worth a roster spot. I think he's a solid option if you're hurting at WR3/FLEX, though I wouldn't want him for much more than that. He has the potential to have a great game any week.

 

[cpd90]

I haven't seen a thread devoted to this, so I will start one. Everyone talks targets, and those are important, but I like seeing how often guys are on the field.These are all week 3 snapshots taken from footballoutsiders.comFor exampleBAL TEPitta 67%Dickson 58%Obviously Pitta is on the field 2/3 of the time, but you compare it to guys like Gronkowski (99%) and there is no comparison. Dickson is on the field enough to stunt Pitta's fantasy growth.For

When you put it into perspective, it's amazing that he leads TEs in targets (30) and is tied for second with RZ targets (6). I'm assuming Dickson is the superior blocker.As for some other interesting trends I guess..Hawkins is STILL only on the field for 50% of the snaps.Jon Baldwin's snaps saw a 20% increase from weeks 1-2 and a 10% increase from weeks 2-3. Breaston, who saw 50 snaps last week is now dealing with a knee injury. I think the time to scoop him up is now.Ashlon Jeffry's snap % has increased by 10% every week since week 1.Cecil shorts doesn't see the field even though he's the most productive WR on that team.

Blackmon 87%Robinson 64%Thomas 42%Elliot 25%Shorts 24%There is no way I could add Shorts based on this - so we are in agreement.

Interesting that Blackmon is on the field so often yet producing so little. Should we assume that he's going to come around at some point? He just doesn't seem to be pulling in his targets. I haven't been able to watch his games, though, so the bias me wants to say that's more on Gabbert than it is on Blackmon.

 

[SameSongNDance]

I haven't seen a thread devoted to this, so I will start one. Everyone talks targets, and those are important, but I like seeing how often guys are on the field.These are all week 3 snapshots taken from footballoutsiders.comFor exampleBAL TEPitta 67%Dickson 58%Obviously Pitta is on the field 2/3 of the time, but you compare it to guys like Gronkowski (99%) and there is no comparison. Dickson is on the field enough to stunt Pitta's fantasy growth.For

When you put it into perspective, it's amazing that he leads TEs in targets (30) and is tied for second with RZ targets (6). I'm assuming Dickson is the superior blocker.As for some other interesting trends I guess..Hawkins is STILL only on the field for 50% of the snaps.Jon Baldwin's snaps saw a 20% increase from weeks 1-2 and a 10% increase from weeks 2-3. Breaston, who saw 50 snaps last week is now dealing with a knee injury. I think the time to scoop him up is now.Ashlon Jeffry's snap % has increased by 10% every week since week 1.Cecil shorts doesn't see the field even though he's the most productive WR on that team.

Blackmon 87%Robinson 64%Thomas 42%Elliot 25%Shorts 24%There is no way I could add Shorts based on this - so we are in agreement.

Interesting that Blackmon is on the field so often yet producing so little. Should we assume that he's going to come around at some point? He just doesn't seem to be pulling in his targets. I haven't been able to watch his games, though, so the bias me wants to say that's more on Gabbert than it is on Blackmon.

I think it's more important to look at week to week snap count % instead of overall, they are usually more telling.In week 1 Blackmon was on the field for 95% of plays, 84% in week 2 and 80% in week 3. He's still going to see the field but it seems as if the coaching staff is giving other WRs a bit more of a shot as they out produce him weekly. It's possible he puts it together versus a vulnerable CIN secondary this week. If he doesn't, I think he might be droppable (he was already dropped in one of my 12-teamers).

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Here's one:

WR3 for NYG:

Hixon NYG had 49% snaps week 1

Barden NYG week 2 (I suppose with Hixon hurt) was in 56%

Randle NYG week 3 (with Barden at WR1 for Nicks) 39%, Jernigan NYG WR 6%

In week 4 could Barden take enough snaps from Hixon and get some targets?

**********************

I also think targets per snaps played would be a pretty interesting stat to see, in general.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Tennessee Week 3 only (Britt's injury makes it better to drop out week 1 and ignore week 2 for the time being)N Washington 92%K Wright 75%K Britt 59%D Williams 46%Washington seems worthy of a roster spot regardless of Britt's health.

Don't forget: Britt was still limited in the type of routes that he was allowed to run in this game. Perhaps he will see the field more when his role becomes more diversified, though it is possible that his ankle injury will further slow that process.Note - I am not disagreeing that Nate Washington is worth a roster spot. I think he's a solid option if you're hurting at WR3/FLEX, though I wouldn't want him for much more than that. He has the potential to have a great game any week.

Britt's snap count will undoubtedly shoot up as the weeks progress. It's odd though, Washington played in 69% of plays in week 1 and 52% in week 2. I wonder why he saw so much of the field last week.Wright's snap count % decreased only slightly as the weeks progressed (81%, 80%, 75%). I would be inclined to think Britt's emergence would come at the cost of Nate's playing time, but that doesn't seem to be the case as of yet.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Here's one:

WR3 for NYG:

Hixon NYG had 49% snaps week 1

Barden NYG week 2 (I suppose with Hixon hurt) was in 56%

Randle NYG week 3 (with Barden at WR1 for Nicks) 39%, Jernigan NYG WR 6%

In week 4 could Barden take enough snaps from Hixon and get some targets?

**********************

I also think targets per snaps played would be a pretty interesting stat to see, in general.

I'm not sure Barden could steal enough targets to make him fantasy relevant once again but he will probably eat into Hixon's real life value as a WR. About the targets per snaps played, I would love to see that stat. I can already tell you for example, that although Nate Washington was in for 92% of plays last week, he only saw 3 targets on day compared to 11 for Britt and Wright. Clearly, he was on the field for other reasons.

 

[Bri]

Tennessee Week 3 only (Britt's injury makes it better to drop out week 1 and ignore week 2 for the time being)N Washington 92%K Wright 75%K Britt 59%D Williams 46%Washington seems worthy of a roster spot regardless of Britt's health.

Don't forget: Britt was still limited in the type of routes that he was allowed to run in this game. Perhaps he will see the field more when his role becomes more diversified, though it is possible that his ankle injury will further slow that process.Note - I am not disagreeing that Nate Washington is worth a roster spot. I think he's a solid option if you're hurting at WR3/FLEX, though I wouldn't want him for much more than that. He has the potential to have a great game any week.

that's 3 WR set plan. Nate is a fine NFL WR-not great, not bad. He plays "#2" and moves into the slot and sometimes he has more speed in the slot than it seems the D expects. He's a piece to the puzzle. Wright and Britt haven't played like their potential.The WR blocking stinks.Williams can't get fazed out. Not best, but most reliable hands and someone is always hurt or suspended.Someday "the other guy" might just be their best for FF purposes, reliability. He's intriguing for dynasty, wait N sit type. I haven't decided on Wright yet, but Williams might also be the only non-diva by the end of the year too.

 

[Bri]

WRs are in on blocking plays and some block better than others. Ya gotta take these with a grain of salt.

Avery stat is awesome, thank you.

If there are three WRs with similar % like 60,60,60...you're not gleaning anything from that.

Targets should really be your focus for a detailed WR stat

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

Here's one:

WR3 for NYG:

Hixon NYG had 49% snaps week 1

Barden NYG week 2 (I suppose with Hixon hurt) was in 56%

Randle NYG week 3 (with Barden at WR1 for Nicks) 39%, Jernigan NYG WR 6%

In week 4 could Barden take enough snaps from Hixon and get some targets?

**********************

I also think targets per snaps played would be a pretty interesting stat to see, in general.

I'm not sure Barden could steal enough targets to make him fantasy relevant once again but he will probably eat into Hixon's real life value as a WR. About the targets per snaps played, I would love to see that stat. I can already tell you for example, that although Nate Washington was in for 92% of plays last week, he only saw 3 targets on day compared to 11 for Britt and Wright. Clearly, he was on the field for other reasons.

pff might have that if you subscribe.they track stuff like routes run, yards/route, tgts/route, etc

 

[duaneok66]

I understand that targets are important, but targets are also a function of stats as well - if you are on the field more (generally speaking) you have the chance to get more targets. Targets vary (sometimes wildly) from game to game - snaps deviate less.

I am just exploring one piece of the puzzle that is rarely discussed.

I love the discussion; I hope we can keep it going.

 

[doeseatplace]

I haven't seen a thread devoted to this, so I will start one. Everyone talks targets, and those are important, but I like seeing how often guys are on the field.These are all week 3 snapshots taken from footballoutsiders.comFor exampleBAL TEPitta 67%Dickson 58%Obviously Pitta is on the field 2/3 of the time, but you compare it to guys like Gronkowski (99%) and there is no comparison. Dickson is on the field enough to stunt Pitta's fantasy growth.For

When you put it into perspective, it's amazing that he leads TEs in targets (30) and is tied for second with RZ targets (6). I'm assuming Dickson is the superior blocker.

Dickson got the jump on Pitta in their first season because of his superior blocking ability, but he was never a natural blocking TE. Ultimately the drops caught up with Ed, making Pitta the better option

 

[Bri]

I understand that targets are important, but targets are also a function of stats as well - if you are on the field more (generally speaking) you have the chance to get more targets. Targets vary (sometimes wildly) from game to game - snaps deviate less. I am just exploring one piece of the puzzle that is rarely discussed.I love the discussion; I hope we can keep it going.

duane you've been playing FF forever...explore away. Newbies might not use this right or weight this properly...unsure what to call it. I didn't mean you.To play devil's advocate for newbies-what if "the chance to get more targets" was the QB looking at the WR and saying "umm nope." I mean there could be a trust issue or (most likely) a not getting open issue. If that were the case, this would lead a newbie to pickup a player that's about to get benched for not getting open/ineffectiveness.

 

[ZWK]

According to PFF, on Baltimore's 135 passing plays Pitta has:

70% running a route

5% blocking

24% on the bench

And Dickson has:

36% running a route

13% blocking

51% on the bench

On their 71 running plays, Pitta has been on the field for 51% and Dickson for 76%.

Pitta is 18th among all TEs in number of pass routes run. Top 10 are Pettigrew, Graham, H Miller, Bennett, Gonzalez, Gronkowski, Finley, Witten, V Davis, and Celek.

 

[duaneok66]

thank you! great stuff!!

 

[duaneok66]

I understand that targets are important, but targets are also a function of stats as well - if you are on the field more (generally speaking) you have the chance to get more targets. Targets vary (sometimes wildly) from game to game - snaps deviate less. I am just exploring one piece of the puzzle that is rarely discussed.I love the discussion; I hope we can keep it going.

duane you've been playing FF forever...explore away. Newbies might not use this right or weight this properly...unsure what to call it. I didn't mean you.To play devil's advocate for newbies-what if "the chance to get more targets" was the QB looking at the WR and saying "umm nope." I mean there could be a trust issue or (most likely) a not getting open issue. If that were the case, this would lead a newbie to pickup a player that's about to get benched for not getting open/ineffectiveness.

good points.

 

[FDC]

Tennessee Week 3 only (Britt's injury makes it better to drop out week 1 and ignore week 2 for the time being)N Washington 92%K Wright 75%K Britt 59%D Williams 46%Washington seems worthy of a roster spot regardless of Britt's health.

Britt also banged up his ankle week 3 and sat because of it late in the game. He was targeted early and often.

 

[JShare87]

Can someone tell me Jimmy Ghrams snap percentage for Sunday it seemed he was off the field a lot.

Good observation, this site, says he was in on 60% of plays last week.So, Graham was in for 79% of snaps in week 1, 68% of snaps in week 2 and 60% of snaps last week. Can someone shed some light on this?

Also, for the record, the new way the snap count stats are set up is totally bogus. It was much easier to find what I needed before. I liked being able to compare a full teams snap count % in one go, now I can only see one player at a time.

So I should definitely trade Graham for Kyle Rudolph is what your saying?

 

[SameSongNDance]

Can someone tell me Jimmy Ghrams snap percentage for Sunday it seemed he was off the field a lot.

Good observation, this site, says he was in on 60% of plays last week.So, Graham was in for 79% of snaps in week 1, 68% of snaps in week 2 and 60% of snaps last week. Can someone shed some light on this?

Also, for the record, the new way the snap count stats are set up is totally bogus. It was much easier to find what I needed before. I liked being able to compare a full teams snap count % in one go, now I can only see one player at a time.

So I should definitely trade Graham for Kyle Rudolph is what your saying?

No. No I wouldn't do that haha.

 

[flc735]

Can someone tell me Jimmy Ghrams snap percentage for Sunday it seemed he was off the field a lot.

Good observation, this site, says he was in on 60% of plays last week.So, Graham was in for 79% of snaps in week 1, 68% of snaps in week 2 and 60% of snaps last week. Can someone shed some light on this?

Also, for the record, the new way the snap count stats are set up is totally bogus. It was much easier to find what I needed before. I liked being able to compare a full teams snap count % in one go, now I can only see one player at a time.

So I should definitely trade Graham for Kyle Rudolph is what your saying?

yes, thats clearly what he is saying

 

[QuizGuy66]

It'd be cool if FBG explored this for the site - kinda like when targets emerged as an important stat a few years back.

Perhaps a breakdown and overall.

% of snaps a player was in for

% of passing plays a player was in for

% of running plays a player was in for

Seeing the trend-line on this can give a sense of what players (particularly young players) are emerging or regressing.

Great thread OP

-QG

 

[the UFFRM]

I heard the Audible mention snap counts on NFL.com but I've looked around and can't find them. Could anyone provide a link or some hints as to where to go?

 

[Modog814]

Interesting that Blackmon is on the field so often yet producing so little. Should we assume that he's going to come around at some point? He just doesn't seem to be pulling in his targets. I haven't been able to watch his games, though, so the bias me wants to say that's more on Gabbert than it is on Blackmon.

I just watched some of the game against Indy. I think it's probably 50/50 at this point. Blackmon had a terrible drop on a slant pattern. But there was 2 plays in the red zone, one where Gabbert threw a terrible ball and was nearly picked off. Another where Gabbert was WIDE OPEN at the goal line and Gabbert threw it into coverage on the other side of the field.

 

[FF Ninja]

Tennessee Week 3 only (Britt's injury makes it better to drop out week 1 and ignore week 2 for the time being)N Washington 92%K Wright 75%K Britt 59%D Williams 46%Washington seems worthy of a roster spot regardless of Britt's health.

Nate has only seen 5 targets in the last two weeks. Sure, he went off with the 3 he got last week, but I'm not rostering someone who only gets 2-3 targets per week. He could play 100% of the snaps, but if he isn't being thrown the ball then it doesn't matter.

 

[Dought Man]

Tennessee Week 3 only (Britt's injury makes it better to drop out week 1 and ignore week 2 for the time being)N Washington 92%K Wright 75%K Britt 59%D Williams 46%Washington seems worthy of a roster spot regardless of Britt's health.

Nate has only seen 5 targets in the last two weeks. Sure, he went off with the 3 he got last week, but I'm not rostering someone who only gets 2-3 targets per week. He could play 100% of the snaps, but if he isn't being thrown the ball then it doesn't matter.

If The Hurt Locker stays on the field, Nate is going to have a very nice year for a WR3/flex type guy... 950/8

 

[Ryan99]

Concerning the relative usefulness of snap percentage versus targets:

How much "autonomy" (for lack of a better word) do QBs have when throwing the ball? My understanding is that a play is more than just a set of routes, its also a set progression the QB goes through looking for an open guy. So if you're a TE, say, and you play on 80% of snaps and run routes on most snaps, but you're always the 4th or 5th option, it doesn't matter how many snaps you see and it's not the QBs fault for not throwing you the ball ... you simply aren't part of the game plan.

On the other hand there are QBs that will stare a guy down and force the ball in even if he's not open (I'm looking at you, Vick). This is going to result in a lot of targets but not many catches, so maybe targets aren't a great stat to use for those guys.

So it seems that what's important is highly dependent on what team and QB you're looking at. Let's say a team has a rookie QB and they're trying to take it easy on him by limiting the number of reads he makes during a play. If a WR sees a lot of snaps but he's the 3rd or 4th option, the fact that he has a high snap percentage is probably meaningless. For a veteran QB who's good at reading defenses and getting the ball to the open guy, targets will probably vary a lot week to week and snap percentage might be a better predictor of success, since it indicates how involved in the offense a receiver generally is.

So here's a hard project for someone to do. Looking at game film, determine on what percentage of passing plays the ball is thrown to the first option, second option, etc. Then determine, for a specific receiver, on what percentage of his routes is he the first option, second option, etc. Combining these two should give an expected number of targets as a function of the number of passing plays run by a team, and this can be compared to a guy's actual targets to see how good of a predictor it is.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I heard the Audible mention snap counts on NFL.com but I've looked around and can't find them. Could anyone provide a link or some hints as to where to go?

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/snapcounts

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

Tennessee Week 3 only (Britt's injury makes it better to drop out week 1 and ignore week 2 for the time being)N Washington 92%K Wright 75%K Britt 59%D Williams 46%Washington seems worthy of a roster spot regardless of Britt's health.

Nate has only seen 5 targets in the last two weeks. Sure, he went off with the 3 he got last week, but I'm not rostering someone who only gets 2-3 targets per week. He could play 100% of the snaps, but if he isn't being thrown the ball then it doesn't matter.

I'm starting to wonder if Wright isn't the Titans' answer to Johnson's rushing troubles.

 

[Modog814]

I heard the Audible mention snap counts on NFL.com but I've looked around and can't find them. Could anyone provide a link or some hints as to where to go?

http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/snapcounts

for some reason this link doesn't work for me (the link works, i just can't get it to give me any data).Here's another I just found:

My link

Don't know much about the website though, so can't attest to it's accuracy.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Danny Woodhead

Week 1 - 21% - 6 carries, 0 receptions

Week 2 - 46% - 9 carries, 1 reception

Week 3 - 63% - 15 carries, 1 reception

Steven Ridley

Week 1 - 60% - 21 carries, 2 receptions

Week 2 - 53% - 18 carries, 3 receptions

Week 3 - 30% - 13 carries, 0 receptions

So, everyone talked of how Hernandez's absence would boost Welker's value, but how does it effect Ridley's value? It seems clear that when NE is going no huddle, they prefer to have the superior pass blocker, Woodhead in, over Ridley. Also, however, how often is NE going to be running two TE sets without Hern around? The more three wide we see, the more likely we'll see Woodhead. Yes, BAL's pass rush has something to do with it, but I wonder if this is a trend will continue to see until Hern comes back. Pats homers, shed some light?

 

[QuizGuy66]

A little dangerous to read into specific game plans, especially for a team like New England that likes to mix it up IMO.

-QG

 

[SameSongNDance]

A little dangerous to read into specific game plans, especially for a team like New England that likes to mix it up IMO.-QG

Extremely dangerous with Shananigans 2.0 but Hern's absence will be a constant for the next couple of weeks. It would seem that certain players have done a 180 (Welker, Ridley, Gronk) since he went down. Small sample size, I know, I just find it interesting.

 

[duaneok66]

A little dangerous to read into specific game plans, especially for a team like New England that likes to mix it up IMO.-QG

was just going to post this.

 

[Ryan99]

Extremely dangerous with Shananigans 2.0 but Hern's absence will be a constant for the next couple of weeks. It would seem that certain players have done a 180 (Welker, Ridley, Gronk) since he went down. Small sample size, I know, I just find it interesting.

So apparently you've posted 730 times in the last 23 days. Impressive.

 

[SameSongNDance]

Extremely dangerous with Shananigans 2.0 but Hern's absence will be a constant for the next couple of weeks. It would seem that certain players have done a 180 (Welker, Ridley, Gronk) since he went down. Small sample size, I know, I just find it interesting.

So apparently you've posted 730 times in the last 23 days. Impressive.

I don't pay attention in class. It'll come back and bit me in the ### sooner rather than later.

 

[duaneok66]

Extremely dangerous with Shananigans 2.0 but Hern's absence will be a constant for the next couple of weeks. It would seem that certain players have done a 180 (Welker, Ridley, Gronk) since he went down. Small sample size, I know, I just find it interesting.

So apparently you've posted 730 times in the last 23 days. Impressive.

are you serious with this? The guy makes good posts.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Extremely dangerous with Shananigans 2.0 but Hern's absence will be a constant for the next couple of weeks. It would seem that certain players have done a 180 (Welker, Ridley, Gronk) since he went down. Small sample size, I know, I just find it interesting.

So apparently you've posted 730 times in the last 23 days. Impressive.

are you serious with this? The guy makes good posts.

I didn't read a negative tone in the post you quoted. Could be wrong.

 

[duaneok66]

Extremely dangerous with Shananigans 2.0 but Hern's absence will be a constant for the next couple of weeks. It would seem that certain players have done a 180 (Welker, Ridley, Gronk) since he went down. Small sample size, I know, I just find it interesting.

So apparently you've posted 730 times in the last 23 days. Impressive.

are you serious with this? The guy makes good posts.

I didn't read a negative tone in the post you quoted. Could be wrong.

I thought he was being sarcastic - if he wasn't, then my apologies.

 

[SameSongNDance]

It's all good, I do make an absurdly large amount of posts per day. Back to stats..

Micheal Floyd saw a bump from 8% of snaps last week to 56% this week. He still only saw 2 targets, but he converted one into an 8 yard TD. His snaps come at the expense of Doucet's.

This trend may have gone under the radar..

Lance Moore

Week 1 - 74% - 10

Week 2 - 72% - 5

Week 3 - 84% - 7

M. Colston

Week 1 - 79% - 11

Week 2 - 69% - 4

Week 3 - 57% - 4

Colston's foot injury has definitely been bothering him. Now that he seems to be over it (not on injury report), he's definitely a good buy low while Moore may be a good sell high.

 

[Ryan99]

I wasn't being negative or sarcastic. It says SameSongNDance joined on 04-September 12, and he has 734 posts. So, like I said, he apparently has 730 posts (more now) in 23 days. Indeed, his profile puts him at 31.9 posts per day. Also, he has 850 profile views in those 23 days. I suspect there's some sort of error in the join date.

 

[duaneok66]

I wasn't being negative or sarcastic. It says SameSongNDance joined on 04-September 12, and he has 734 posts. So, like I said, he apparently has 730 posts (more now) in 23 days. Indeed, his profile puts him at 31.9 posts per day. Also, he has 850 profile views in those 23 days. I suspect there's some sort of error in the join date.

sorry - I misunderstood.