Mike Clay's 2020 NFL Projection Guide + FBG projections (1 Viewer)

[JohnnyU]

I don't see Pittman reaching 700 yards unless Hilton gets hurt. The Colts 3rd and 4th WRs (Campbell and Pascal) are very good, and there will be a lot of targets and production for the TEs and RBs.

Pascal isn't "very good", wrong there.  Campbell hasn't done anything yet due to injury, so how is he very good?

 

[Tau837]

Pascal isn't "very good", wrong there.  Campbell hasn't done anything yet due to injury, so how is he very good?

I disagree.

Pascal is very good for a 4th WR. He led the team in receiving last season and averaged 8.4 YPT, which was #51 in the league across all positions, despite poor QB play. 

Campbell was a second round pick for a reason. He was unlucky with injuries last season, but I expect him to be a very good WR2/3 if healthy. 

I have read nothing but positive stuff about both of them this offseason. 

 

[BINGBING]

His lack of perfection is totally inexcusable.  How dare he get one wrong when millions of FF players are literally making the entirety of their management decisions based on what he says.  I just gave him my MFL login info so he could save me the time of having to actually click the buttons myself. 

I plan a civil suit.

I listed countless flaws in his projections....among just the rookies alone.  Stop being a bootlicker to the "names" in the industry and them going along with their group think when one of them gets called out for it, and stop acting like i'm ripping him as if I rely on his projections.  Stat projections as a whole are pointless.  That's why i'm poking holes through it.  Joe Bryant warning me to not criticize Clay's analysis is both censorship and unproductive for everyone attempting to learn from the information.

I provided more enlightenment in this thread bringing up the 700 yard rookie WR threshold than all of his projections combined.

 

[Biabreakable]

It should be noted that these are projections for 15 games. I don't know if that is a sort of built in injury likelihood modifier of sorts, as some people are projected for fewer, but nobody is at more than 15. 

If you take the average YPG numbers, and add a 16th game, it pushes both Jefferson and Lamb over 700 yards.

Good catch.

There is some variation to this. For example he has Devante Adams only playing 14 games at WR 5 overall. Will Fuller he has projected for 13 games. Alshon Jeffrey projected for 9 games.

I don't see anyone else projected for less than 13 games at WR.

Clay is higher on Reagor than any FBG projection for him.

The FBG projections have the games listed in the positional projections and DD has Alshon Jeffrey playing 14 games. So there would be a difference because of that.

Looking at Jason Woods projections for the Eagles he has Jeffrey playing in 10 games, closer to Clays guess. yet only has Reagor getting 37 receptions 505 yards in 15 games played.

Clay has Reagor with 51 receptions in 15 games.

I think Clay might be low here but close. I think Reagor could have better than 12 ypr on that type of volume.

Main difference I see between Wood and Clays Eagle projections is Wood has JJAWS with 30 receptions while Clay has him with 7.

My guess is that Wood has JJACW taking over more snaps and looks when Jeffrey is out than Clay does.

Why the Eagles need to use Jeffrey or JJAWV when they already have Ertz and Goddert on the team baffles me. How about some WR with speed and big play ability to compliment the big TE?

Having every receiver be a slow possession option only attractive in the red zone.

 

[Biabreakable]

I wouldn't be surprised if zero rookie WRs hit that threshold this season.  These guys have lost 2+ months of time that rookies typically would have to work with their teams and QBs.  It's going to be very sloppy for a while, and the rookies are generally not going to hit the ground running.

That is also a fair point that the rookies will be even further behind than usual.

 

[Biabreakable]

I think projecting games in general has additional risk this year as any of these players could miss games due to being quarantined at any time. 

 

[Tau837]

I provided more enlightenment in this thread

 

[tangfoot]

Mike Clay is clueless.

Joe Bryant warning me to not criticize Clay's analysis is both censorship and unproductive for everyone attempting to learn from the information.

Calling someone clueness is not analysis and has no place in civilised conversation.  And Joe has every right to apply any and all appropriate censorship on the forum that he owns.

 

[Hankmoody]

I listed countless flaws in his projections....among just the rookies alone.  Stop being a bootlicker to the "names" in the industry and them going along with their group think when one of them gets called out for it, and stop acting like i'm ripping him as if I rely on his projections.  Stat projections as a whole are pointless.  That's why i'm poking holes through it.  Joe Bryant warning me to not criticize Clay's analysis is both censorship and unproductive for everyone attempting to learn from the information.

I provided more enlightenment in this thread bringing up the 700 yard rookie WR threshold than all of his projections combined.

In the post I quoted you provide one hindsight-aided fact.  One.  Later you ranted about your opinion of his projections, but then quite ironically stated that projections are pointless.  Your opinion is nothing more than a manifestation of your personal projection of what will happen.  Even your magical 700 yard rookie WR threshold is a projection (and one that's watered down by a reduced offseason where guys aren't going to have nearly the opportunity to ramp up as they have in the past) that you then project this more talented (projected) class to surpass.

Quite a contribution.

 

[Biabreakable]

Personally I was impressed that DDs projections were so accurately aligned with the 20 year average.

That certainly wasn't his goal going into it. Right on the money anyways.