Nate Burleson, Andre Johnson, and Roy Williams are (1 Viewer)

[cstu]

First of all, I'm not expecting any of these guy to fall off the face of the planet and be complete busts. However, they are young receivers who have not ranked above #16 (Burleson last year was the highest) and I think it's likely they will under-perform their draft ranking.All three of them are ranked in the top 15 despite the fact that history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year. Now, you might be asking "but wait, Burleson and Johnson have had over 1000 yards when they were aged 23 and under - shouldn't they be able to repeat that with a year more experience?" It's a good question, but again history shows that it's not very likely. Here are the list of 23 year old WR's who gained 1000 yards and their position rank at 23 and 24:Andre Rison (#8 WR at 23, #16 at 24) Isaac Bruce (#2 WR at 23, #8 at 24) Germane Crowell (#8 WR at 23, #63 at 24 - injured, missed 7 games) Randy Moss (#2 WR at 23, #1 at 24) Darrell Jackson (#16 WR at 23, #34 at 24 - injured, missed 3 games) David Boston (#3 WR at 23, #73 at 24 - injured, missed 8 games)Anquan Boldin (#4 WR at 23, #59 at 24 - injured, missed 6 games)Ignoring the players who were injured and looking at the players who stayed healthy (Rison, Bruce, Moss and Jackson(though he missed 3 games)), only Moss and Bruce produced top 15 numbers at age 24. What's interesting to note is that Moss and Bruce were #2 WR's at 23, while Rison and Jackson were #8 and #16 respectively. Neither Burleson nor Johnson have proven that they are top tier players as Moss and Bruce did and in my opinion have more in common with Rison and Jackson based on last year's ranking (#16 and #22).Roy Williams seems even less likely to gain 1000 yards given the competition he has at WR on his team. While he's a very talented player, he is still only 24 with one season under his belt and two other top WR's battling for catches.All three stand to have good seasons, but I would temper expectations for these young WR's.

 

[Bigtime]

Excellent post. Well thought out. I completely agree and would not and did not draft any of those guys because they went too early. They don't look like busts but certainly don't warrant their ADP's.

 

[0tis.]

Agree completely.

 

[Rev]

Great observations cstu. You bring up 3 questionable WR's, who may not actually demonstrate their ADP worth. Yet, with Roy and AJ, the issue is situational. No one would argue that those two don't have the tools and skills to be top 5, and I don't think you are. They lack the consistancy and the situation. I think it's important to note that. Burlson, however, has neither the physical tools nor the situation to match top 15 production, IMO. Though a solid player who works hard and gets tough yards after the catch, he stands in a very crowded WR core (with or without Koren in town) on a team that will spread the ball around alot. I think that the Vikes will kick out a receiver who approaches 1000 yards each year, but it will likely rotate between several guys, depending on who's healthy.

 

[acefootball]

Would you add Mi. Clayton in there ?

 

[hwjchim]

Wow...Great post..

 

[phrozen]

agree with the other postersnice job cstu - very informative post

 

[reg]

so basically for these three players we should look for one to be injured, one to make the top 15, and one to drop out of the top 15?:rollthedice:

 

[cstu]

Would you add Mi. Clayton in there ?

Good question. Yes, I originally had planned on including him but I wanted to keep it as simple as possible. If he wasn't coming off a knee injury and had played more in the preseason I would be higher on him. He finished the season the #13 WR (1193/7) as a 22 year old rookie and had the best rookie season by a WR aged 22 and under since Randy Moss. I love his ability and situation, but with only 5 catches in the preseason after a knee injury I'm wary of using such a high pick on him.

 

[Hoosier Daddy]

I actually have Johnson in a keeper league and am looking at trading him for Burleson. I just feel that Carr is keeping Johnson's numbers from being what they could be and obviously Pepper can produce better numbers for Nate. That is just my take on it though I do agree with most of what has already been posted.

 

[packersfan]

I'm completely sold on Burleson finishing Top 15 -- and possibly Top 10 -- this season. I think he's the real deal. I think Johnson and Williams are also both extremely talented, but I'm less confident in them as WR1s (of the two I would rather have Johnson in that role) due to the fact both are playing with QBs with consistency issues. And in Williams' case, there are other quality options in the receiving game for the Lions to utilize which could impact his productivity.But assuming the post that began this thread is correct, the question then becomes: If Burleson, Johnson and Williams won't finish as Top 15 WRs this season who will replace them?

 

[cstu]

so basically for these three players we should look for one to be injured, one to make the top 15, and one to drop out of the top 15?

:rollthedice:

Those are the odds and they really aren't that bad. However, I see Drew Bennett, Reggie Wayne, DJax, Ward, Driver, Steve Smith and maybe even Boldin as being better risk/reward picks.

 

[Frenchy Fuqua]

Roy Williams seems even less likely to gain 1000 yards given the competition he has at WR on his team. While he's a very talented player, he is still only 24 with one season under his belt and two other top WR's battling for catches.

All three stand to have good seasons, but I would temper expectations for these young WR's.

Good info but Roy Williams doesn't turn 24 until December 20th.

 

[Patoons]

so basically for these three players we should look for one to be injured, one to make the top 15, and one to drop out of the top 15?

:rollthedice:

Those are the odds and they really aren't that bad. However, I see Drew Bennett, Reggie Wayne, DJax, Ward, Driver, Steve Smith and maybe even Boldin as being better risk/reward picks.

Nice thread.I'm curious why you are high on Bennett, who showed nothing without Mason there last season and down on Burleson who was on a 90/1000 pace without Moss?

I do agree on ROY and AJ that they are overrated and drafted way too high given situation. Their teams will kill their fantasy value.

 

[cstu]

so basically for these three players we should look for one to be injured, one to make the top 15, and one to drop out of the top 15?

:rollthedice:

Those are the odds and they really aren't that bad. However, I see Drew Bennett, Reggie Wayne, DJax, Ward, Driver, Steve Smith and maybe even Boldin as being better risk/reward picks.

Nice thread.I'm curious why you are high on Bennett, who showed nothing without Mason there last season and down on Burleson who was on a 90/1000 pace without Moss?

I do agree on ROY and AJ that they are overrated and drafted way too high given situation. Their teams will kill their fantasy value.

The main reason is the lack of competition, which can go both ways I suppose. Like Burleson, he has a very good QB and is in an offense that will air the ball out. I will be surprised if he doesn't match last year's stats since he's going into this season healthy, unlike last year, and with Norm Chow calling the plays. Someone has to catch the ball in that offense and Bennett is looking like the guy who is going to get his number called a lot.

 

[cstu]

Roy Williams seems even less likely to gain 1000 yards given the competition he has at WR on his team. While he's a very talented player, he is still only 24 with one season under his belt and two other top WR's battling for catches.

All three stand to have good seasons, but I would temper expectations for these young WR's.

Good info but Roy Williams doesn't turn 24 until December 20th.

All the historical numbers I used were based on the age a player turned sometime that year. However, younger doesn't mean better and 24 year old WR's are actually more likely to get 1000 yards than 23 year olds (15 vs. 9 since 1990).

 

[toofunny]

Bottom line is you want to draft players who will perform to the spot you drafted them, without question. And have an upside to out perform that draft spot.I see a lot of people drafting people to where they COULD end up if they reach their upside. Which is obviously a mistake. If a player has to have a career year to reach the value of their draft spot, it was a bad pick. I saw a few great posts about projecting the bottom and top end of each player. When you start looking at variance, it really changes the value of players. As to these guys, Roy probably won't get 10 TDs. Harrington sucks, Rogers is good, and so is Mike Williams. Johnson also probably won't hit 10 tds. Carr sucks, the offense sucks, and they have solid #2 and #3 options. Burleson has the best chance at 10 tds, simple because the Vikings D sucks, and Cpepp is an elite QB. If it weren't for manning, people would be talking about taking cpepp 1st overall. In a lot of league scoring systems cpepp had a better year then Manning. So if you think Wayne a #2 is going to get 8-10 TDs, then the #1 for Cpepp should at the worst get 10 TDs.

 

[4thAndForever]

Solid objective analysis. Now for some unsupported, subjective opinions:I think in real life football, Andre Johnson is one of the best 5 WRs in the game right now. With a better offense around him, or with the further development of David Carr, he could be an elite fantasy WR.Thanks to the drafting of Mike Williams, I'm not nearly as high on Roy Williams as I otherwise might have been. That's a crowded receiving corps at this point. I also have this hunch that he may prove to be injury-prone.And I'm not sold on Burleson at all. I'm just not.

 

[packersfan]

so basically for these three players we should look for one to be injured, one to make the top 15, and one to drop out of the top 15?

:rollthedice:

Those are the odds and they really aren't that bad. However, I see Drew Bennett, Reggie Wayne, DJax, Ward, Driver, Steve Smith and maybe even Boldin as being better risk/reward picks.

Nice thread.I'm curious why you are high on Bennett, who showed nothing without Mason there last season and down on Burleson who was on a 90/1000 pace without Moss?

I do agree on ROY and AJ that they are overrated and drafted way too high given situation. Their teams will kill their fantasy value.

The main reason is the lack of competition, which can go both ways I suppose. Like Burleson, he has a very good QB and is in an offense that will air the ball out. I will be surprised if he doesn't match last year's stats since he's going into this season healthy, unlike last year, and with Norm Chow calling the plays. Someone has to catch the ball in that offense and Bennett is looking like the guy who is going to get his number called a lot.

The same could be said of Andre Johnson in terms of the number of targets he'll receive this season.

 

[Chase Stuart]

First of all, I'm not expecting any of these guy to fall off the face of the planet and be complete busts. However, they are young receivers who have not ranked above #16 (Burleson last year was the highest) and I think it's likely they will under-perform their draft ranking.

All three of them are ranked in the top 15 despite the fact that history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year.

Now, you might be asking "but wait, Burleson and Johnson have had over 1000 yards when they were aged 23 and under - shouldn't they be able to repeat that with a year more experience?" It's a good question, but again history shows that it's not very likely. Here are the list of 23 year old WR's who gained 1000 yards and their position rank at 23 and 24:

Andre Rison (#8 WR at 23, #16 at 24)

Isaac Bruce (#2 WR at 23, #8 at 24)

Germane Crowell (#8 WR at 23, #63 at 24 - injured)

Randy Moss (#2 WR at 23, #1 at 24)

Darrell Jackson (#16 WR at 23, #34 at 24)

David Boston (#3 WR at 23, #73 at 24 - injured)

Anquan Boldin (#4 WR at 23, #59 at 24 - injured)

Ignoring the players who were injured and looking at the players who stayed healthy (Rison, Bruce, Moss and Jackson), only Moss and Bruce produced top 15 numbers at age 24. What's interesting to note is that Moss and Bruce were #2 WR's at 23, while Rison and Jackson were #8 and #16 respectively.

Neither Burleson nor Johnson have proven that they are top tier players as Moss and Bruce did and in my opinion have more in common with Rison and Jackson based on last year's ranking (#16 and #22).

Roy Williams seems even less likely to gain 1000 yards given the competition he has at WR on his team. While he's a very talented player, he is still only 24 with one season under his belt and two other top WR's battling for catches.

All three stand to have good seasons, but I would temper expectations for these young WR's.

Hey cstu,Great stuff. Maybe if I get home tonight I'll cook up some supporting stats on my home computer. Until then...

Darrell Jackson was injured in 2002. In 2001 he averaged 9.8 FP/G, while in 2002 he averaged 8.6 FP/G.

Andre Rison did performed marginally worse in his year 24 season (10.5 FP/G) than he did during his year 23 season (11.3 FP/G), but that was most certainly due to the maturation of Michael Haynes -- who had 677 more yards and 11 more TDs in year N+1 than in year N.

Isaac Bruce's phenomenal 1995 season was one for the ages, but he's not a valid comparison for this study. The Rams brought in a rookie Tony Banks to be the QB in 1996, which certainly explained Bruce's drop to WR8.

Randy Moss improved from year 23 to year 24.

So of the seven WRs you found that had 1,000 yards or more at age 23:

Three of them suffered a serious injury. You didn't bring a theory about as to why 24 year old star receivers are more susceptible to injury, so I think we're in agreement that this appeared to be a random occurrence.

One of them improved

One of them had to deal with a new rookie QB

One of them suffered a horrific injury, but had very similar point production.

And one of them had similar point production despite the presence of a new star WR opposite him.

Now while it's possible that Travis Taylor or Charles Rogers or Mike Williams or Troy Williamson (or Jabar Gaffney ) have an excellent breakout year, I don't think that is any more likely to kill Burleson/Johnson/Williams' value than a non-24 year old WR. Burleson, Bennett, Steve Smith and others have similar young and talented WRs to contend with.

Since neither Williams, Johnson or Burleson have a new QB to deal with, or can be expedcted to suffer a serious injury, I'm not really sure I see any data to make me think any of those three are overvalued. Considering Moss ranked 2nd (and is in a league of his own compared to these three), I don't think any of the three WRs really fit the profile of the group you created.

But good research and analysis, I just see things a different way.

 

[HoTnickZ]

I mean I know where you're coming from but not sure I follow the 'logic' here... and yes I believe Johnson is overrated, while Burleson is not and it is pretty much totally attributed to their situations. There's no question who is the more talented receiver but you switch them to the other's team and it would be the opposite x 2 in terms of productivity. Roy is probably a little overrated although I didn't get the impression anyone was considering him for top 10 nominations, his situation will make him a streaky contributor having a couple of multiple TD games and probably being blanked out in quite a few. As for the evidence you provided, isn't it basically happenstance, basically 3 of them were injured (can't possibly tell me this has anything to do with their age), 1 stayed as one of the game's best, 2 others had relatively minor drop offs and 1 had a major one with slight injury problems. I think it's safe to say that other factors had a lot more of an affect on the results the following year than just simply their age.

 

[Chase Stuart]

For the record, I do believe that Johnson and Williams are significantly overvalued. I wrote the positive face-off on Burleson for the FBG Magazine, so you may know my feelings on him. But my reasons for disliking Johnson (which can be found in many threads via the search function) and Williams (He's in the worst situation possible -- great talented surrounding WRs but a weak QB. Consider him the anti-Terrell Owens) have nothing to do with them turning 24 this season.

 

[packersfan]

I think in real life football, Andre Johnson is one of the best 5 WRs in the game right now. With a better offense around him, or with the further development of David Carr, he could be an elite fantasy WR.

I agree. He is a seriously talented WR. The optimism I have for him this season stems from the Texans' reportedly going to great lengths this season to free him up from coverage and get him the ball in a wide variety of manners plus the fact their other WRs are -- at best -- pedestrian and pose no threat to him from a target perspective. But it really hinges on Carr and whether he will show continued development and more consistency this season. When he faded down the stretch last season, Johnson went from an automatic start to bench fodder in many leagues. If you draft him as your WR1 this season you simply cannot afford to have that happen again.

 

[BassNBrew]

First of all, I'm not expecting any of these guy to fall off the face of the planet and be complete busts. However, they are young receivers who have not ranked above #16 (Burleson last year was the highest) and I think it's likely they will under-perform their draft ranking.

All three of them are ranked in the top 15 despite the fact that history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year.

Now, you might be asking "but wait, Burleson and Johnson have had over 1000 yards when they were aged 23 and under - shouldn't they be able to repeat that with a year more experience?" It's a good question, but again history shows that it's not very likely. Here are the list of 23 year old WR's who gained 1000 yards and their position rank at 23 and 24:

Andre Rison (#8 WR at 23, #16 at 24)

Isaac Bruce (#2 WR at 23, #8 at 24)

Germane Crowell (#8 WR at 23, #63 at 24 - injured, missed 7 games)

Randy Moss (#2 WR at 23, #1 at 24)

Darrell Jackson (#16 WR at 23, #34 at 24 - injured, missed 3 games)

David Boston (#3 WR at 23, #73 at 24 - injured, missed 8 games)

Anquan Boldin (#4 WR at 23, #59 at 24 - injured, missed 6 games)

Ignoring the players who were injured and looking at the players who stayed healthy (Rison, Bruce, Moss and Jackson(though he missed 3 games)), only Moss and Bruce produced top 15 numbers at age 24. What's interesting to note is that Moss and Bruce were #2 WR's at 23, while Rison and Jackson were #8 and #16 respectively.

Neither Burleson nor Johnson have proven that they are top tier players as Moss and Bruce did and in my opinion have more in common with Rison and Jackson based on last year's ranking (#16 and #22).

Roy Williams seems even less likely to gain 1000 yards given the competition he has at WR on his team. While he's a very talented player, he is still only 24 with one season under his belt and two other top WR's battling for catches.

All three stand to have good seasons, but I would temper expectations for these young WR's.

Dare I say 3 digit analysis.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

I think You are totally correct on Andre and Roy.Personally I think Nate is ready to explode and has a better chance of finishing top5/top 10 than Andre and Roy.

 

[cstu]

First of all, I'm not expecting any of these guy to fall off the face of the planet and be complete busts. However, they are young receivers who have not ranked above #16 (Burleson last year was the highest) and I think it's likely they will under-perform their draft ranking.

All three of them are ranked in the top 15 despite the fact that history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year.

Now, you might be asking "but wait, Burleson and Johnson have had over 1000 yards when they were aged 23 and under - shouldn't they be able to repeat that with a year more experience?" It's a good question, but again history shows that it's not very likely. Here are the list of 23 year old WR's who gained 1000 yards and their position rank at 23 and 24:

Andre Rison (#8 WR at 23, #16 at 24)

Isaac Bruce (#2 WR at 23, #8 at 24)

Germane Crowell (#8 WR at 23, #63 at 24 - injured)

Randy Moss (#2 WR at 23, #1 at 24)

Darrell Jackson (#16 WR at 23, #34 at 24)

David Boston (#3 WR at 23, #73 at 24 - injured)

Anquan Boldin (#4 WR at 23, #59 at 24 - injured)

Ignoring the players who were injured and looking at the players who stayed healthy (Rison, Bruce, Moss and Jackson), only Moss and Bruce produced top 15 numbers at age 24. What's interesting to note is that Moss and Bruce were #2 WR's at 23, while Rison and Jackson were #8 and #16 respectively.

Neither Burleson nor Johnson have proven that they are top tier players as Moss and Bruce did and in my opinion have more in common with Rison and Jackson based on last year's ranking (#16 and #22).

Roy Williams seems even less likely to gain 1000 yards given the competition he has at WR on his team. While he's a very talented player, he is still only 24 with one season under his belt and two other top WR's battling for catches.

All three stand to have good seasons, but I would temper expectations for these young WR's.

Hey cstu,Great stuff. Maybe if I get home tonight I'll cook up some supporting stats on my home computer. Until then...

Darrell Jackson was injured in 2002. In 2001 he averaged 9.8 FP/G, while in 2002 he averaged 8.6 FP/G.

Andre Rison did performed marginally worse in his year 24 season (10.5 FP/G) than he did during his year 23 season (11.3 FP/G), but that was most certainly due to the maturation of Michael Haynes -- who had 677 more yards and 11 more TDs in year N+1 than in year N.

Isaac Bruce's phenomenal 1995 season was one for the ages, but he's not a valid comparison for this study. The Rams brought in a rookie Tony Banks to be the QB in 1996, which certainly explained Bruce's drop to WR8.

Randy Moss improved from year 23 to year 24.

So of the seven WRs you found that had 1,000 yards or more at age 23:

Three of them suffered a serious injury. You didn't bring a theory about as to why 24 year old star receivers are more susceptible to injury, so I think we're in agreement that this appeared to be a random occurrence.

One of them improved

One of them had to deal with a new rookie QB

One of them suffered a horrific injury, but had very similar point production.

And one of them had similar point production despite the presence of a new star WR opposite him.

Now while it's possible that Travis Taylor or Charles Rogers or Mike Williams or Troy Williamson (or Jabar Gaffney ) have an excellent breakout year, I don't think that is any more likely to kill Burleson/Johnson/Williams' value than a non-24 year old WR. Burleson, Bennett, Steve Smith and others have similar young and talented WRs to contend with.

Since neither Williams, Johnson or Burleson have a new QB to deal with, or can be expedcted to suffer a serious injury, I'm not really sure I see any data to make me think any of those three are overvalued. Considering Moss ranked 2nd (and is in a league of his own compared to these three), I don't think any of the three WRs really fit the profile of the group you created.

But good research and analysis, I just see things a different way.

No, I don't have any theory on all the injuries. It seems odd but I wouldn't imagine that there's some innate problem with being a 24 year old and staying healthy.

Here's my take on your points:

One of them improved - Moss is doesn't really fit in with the rest of these guys since he a freakishly talented WR, which I don't think any of these guys can directly compare to.

One of them had to deal with a new rookie QB - Good point, but in 1995 Bruce didn't exactly have great QB's in Miller and Rypien.

One of them suffered a horrific injury, but had very similar point production. DJax is really the one that I liken these guys to. He's talented and performed nearly up to his previous year on a PPG basis. Andre Johnson seems to fit right in there and if he has a more aggresive offense he would probably have a huge season. However, I don't see it happening this year - at least not enough to justify his ADP.

And one of them had similar point production despite the presence of a new star WR opposite him. Burleson and Roy remind me of Rison's situation. It's hard to guess whether Williamson will be reliable this year, but I expect Rogers or BMW to be a big part of the Lions offense right away.

 

[cstu]

Dare I say 3 digit analysis.

You would almost think I was an old school Mr. Football guy.

 

[wannabee]

good point ... mid-4 digits

 

[cstu]

I mean I know where you're coming from but not sure I follow the 'logic' here

... and yes I believe Johnson is overrated, while Burleson is not and it is pretty much totally attributed to their situations. There's no question who is the more talented receiver but you switch them to the other's team and it would be the opposite x 2 in terms of productivity. Roy is probably a little overrated although I didn't get the impression anyone was considering him for top 10 nominations, his situation will make him a streaky contributor having a couple of multiple TD games and probably being blanked out in quite a few. As for the evidence you provided, isn't it basically happenstance, basically 3 of them were injured (can't possibly tell me this has anything to do with their age), 1 stayed as one of the game's best, 2 others had relatively minor drop offs and 1 had a major one with slight injury problems. I think it's safe to say that other factors had a lot more of an affect on the results the following year than just simply their age.

The biggest issue I have with these guys is not their talent (I love them in dynasty leagues, especially Johnson and Roy) but their 3rd round ADP. I just don't see their upside, even Burleson who seems to have an ideal situation. However, I can't believe that the Vikings drafted Williamson #7 overall to not get him involved right away. Then with Taylor and Robinson in the mix and now KRob, things really aren't looking that good for Burleson.

 

[Clarkmeister]

Hey cstu,

Great stuff. Maybe if I get home tonight I'll cook up some supporting stats on my home computer. Until then...

Darrell Jackson was injured in 2002. In 2001 he averaged 9.8 FP/G, while in 2002 he averaged 8.6 FP/G.

Andre Rison did performed marginally worse in his year 24 season (10.5 FP/G) than he did during his year 23 season (11.3 FP/G), but that was most certainly due to the maturation of Michael Haynes -- who had 677 more yards and 11 more TDs in year N+1 than in year N.

Isaac Bruce's phenomenal 1995 season was one for the ages, but he's not a valid comparison for this study. The Rams brought in a rookie Tony Banks to be the QB in 1996, which certainly explained Bruce's drop to WR8.

Randy Moss improved from year 23 to year 24.

So of the seven WRs you found that had 1,000 yards or more at age 23:

Three of them suffered a serious injury. You didn't bring a theory about as to why 24 year old star receivers are more susceptible to injury, so I think we're in agreement that this appeared to be a random occurrence.

One of them improved

One of them had to deal with a new rookie QB

One of them suffered a horrific injury, but had very similar point production.

And one of them had similar point production despite the presence of a new star WR opposite him.

Now while it's possible that Travis Taylor or Charles Rogers or Mike Williams or Troy Williamson (or Jabar Gaffney ) have an excellent breakout year, I don't think that is any more likely to kill Burleson/Johnson/Williams' value than a non-24 year old WR. Burleson, Bennett, Steve Smith and others have similar young and talented WRs to contend with.

Since neither Williams, Johnson or Burleson have a new QB to deal with, or can be expedcted to suffer a serious injury, I'm not really sure I see any data to make me think any of those three are overvalued. Considering Moss ranked 2nd (and is in a league of his own compared to these three), I don't think any of the three WRs really fit the profile of the group you created.

But good research and analysis, I just see things a different way.

I agree. This post that is getting lauded as "great analysis" is basically just irrelevant data mining. Grab any random football game and you can dig deeply enough and find some ridiculous stat that supports either team. This is the same type of post. We are supposed to believe there is something magical about 24 year olds? Where's the analysis about the 33 year olds? I bet I can find something that suggests Marvin and Horn are going to drop off. It's pure coincidence, which should be obvious when noting that half the OP's list was injured and the rest, excluding Moss, simply happened to have below-average years in that one random season. Big deal.

What *would* be meaningful is if the OP showed the FBG top 15, compared his ranking of each of these 3, and explained why he has them ranked lower (and if the answer is "they are 24", we can all stop reading right there) and who he moved ahead of them and why. But as is, this post is hardly relevant, meaningful or insightful.

 

[PRS Guy]

Spurious correlation

 

[packersfan]

I mean I know where you're coming from but not sure I follow the 'logic' here

... and yes I believe Johnson is overrated, while Burleson is not and it is pretty much totally attributed to their situations. There's no question who is the more talented receiver but you switch them to the other's team and it would be the opposite x 2 in terms of productivity. Roy is probably a little overrated although I didn't get the impression anyone was considering him for top 10 nominations, his situation will make him a streaky contributor having a couple of multiple TD games and probably being blanked out in quite a few. As for the evidence you provided, isn't it basically happenstance, basically 3 of them were injured (can't possibly tell me this has anything to do with their age), 1 stayed as one of the game's best, 2 others had relatively minor drop offs and 1 had a major one with slight injury problems. I think it's safe to say that other factors had a lot more of an affect on the results the following year than just simply their age.

The biggest issue I have with these guys is not their talent (I love them in dynasty leagues, especially Johnson and Roy) but their 3rd round ADP. I just don't see their upside, even Burleson who seems to have an ideal situation. However, I can't believe that the Vikings drafted Williamson #7 overall to not get him involved right away. Then with Taylor and Robinson in the mix and now KRob, things really aren't looking that good for Burleson.

Or you could look at it that Burleson's main competition for targets among the WRs are two career underachievers (Taylor and KRob), one wildly inconsistent veteran (Robinson) and a rookie (Williamson) who's going to take some time to totally grasp the nuances of the system and playing WR in the NFL.Just another perspective.

 

[beaglemac]

Everyone is quick to throw AJ in as a bust, but 2 solid years under his belt, an offense that seems to be getting better should only help him. 970 and 1100 yards in his first 2 years appears to me that he is more than capable of repeating those numbers if not better them.

 

[packersfan]

What *would* be meaningful is if the OP showed the FBG top 15, compared his ranking of each of these 3, and explained why he has them ranked lower (and if the answer is "they are 24", we can all stop reading right there) and who he moved ahead of them and why.

I asked that question several posts back and have yet to receive an answer. To me, this is an extremely pertinent question. Since all of the WRs in question are being drafted as Top 15 WRs in most drafts than who is going to replace them in the Top 15 if they fall? It's one thing to say Player X, Y and Z may not live up to their billing; it's another to step up and identify which players are going to represent stronger Top 15 value.

 

[BassNBrew]

What *would* be meaningful is if the OP showed the FBG top 15, compared his ranking of each of these 3, and explained why he has them ranked lower (and if the answer is "they are 24", we can all stop reading right there) and who he moved ahead of them and why.

I asked that question several posts back and have yet to receive an answer. To me, this is an extremely pertinent question. Since all of the WRs in question are being drafted as Top 15 WRs in most drafts than who is going to replace them in the Top 15 if they fall? It's one thing to say Player X, Y and Z may not live up to their billing; it's another to step up and identify which players are going to represent stronger Top 15 value.

BranchBoldin

Smith

Driver

Lelie

bassnbrewrules

 

[AnonymousBob]

Everyone is quick to throw AJ in as a bust, but 2 solid years under his belt, an offense that seems to be getting better should only help him. 970 and 1100 yards in his first 2 years appears to me that he is more than capable of repeating those numbers if not better them.

IIRC, the offense was changed up to get AJ more involved this season. Capers I thought had said they were going to get him catches on slants and let him get major YAC. That was one of AJ's strengths last year, he finished number three I believe in YAC so if that becomes their focus now I would think his stock to be on its way up.

 

[Patoons]

Everyone is quick to throw AJ in as a bust, but 2 solid years under his belt, an offense that seems to be getting better should only help him. 970 and 1100 yards in his first 2 years appears to me that he is more than capable of repeating those numbers if not better them.

IIRC, the offense was changed up to get AJ more involved this season. Capers I thought had said they were going to get him catches on slants and let him get major YAC. That was one of AJ's strengths last year, he finished number three I believe in YAC so if that becomes their focus now I would think his stock to be on its way up.

He also go some eye surgery IIRC.Problem is that the line is sub-par and doesn't give Carr enough time to let the play develop and make the most use of AJ's skills.

 

[packersfan]

What *would* be meaningful is if the OP showed the FBG top 15, compared his ranking of each of these 3, and explained why he has them ranked lower (and if the answer is "they are 24", we can all stop reading right there) and who he moved ahead of them and why.

I asked that question several posts back and have yet to receive an answer. To me, this is an extremely pertinent question. Since all of the WRs in question are being drafted as Top 15 WRs in most drafts than who is going to replace them in the Top 15 if they fall? It's one thing to say Player X, Y and Z may not live up to their billing; it's another to step up and identify which players are going to represent stronger Top 15 value.

BranchBoldin

Smith

Driver

Lelie

bassnbrewrules

Now we're getting somewhere. As for your list

Branch: I love the talent, but he can never stay healthy. If he can ever play a full 16-game season I do think he has Top 20 talent and possibly Top 15 fantasy potential.

Boldin: Absolutely a guy who could crack the Top 15. However, I have MAJOR concerns about Warner at QB and I think that will prevent Boldin from reaching that level.

Steve Smith: I'm a huge Smith fan and I absolutely agree he's a legit Top 15 talent.

Driver: I love the guy and I think he'll have another Pro Bowl-caliber season but I think he's sitting just outside the Top 15 range.

Lelie: A real up-and-comer but people continue to ignore Rod Smith and I think that's a mistake from a fantasy perspective. Smith will continue to get his and I think that will prevent Lelie from attaining Top 15 status.

 

[AnonymousBob]

Everyone is quick to throw AJ in as a bust, but 2 solid years under his belt, an offense that seems to be getting better should only help him. 970 and 1100 yards in his first 2 years appears to me that he is more than capable of repeating those numbers if not better them.

IIRC, the offense was changed up to get AJ more involved this season. Capers I thought had said they were going to get him catches on slants and let him get major YAC. That was one of AJ's strengths last year, he finished number three I believe in YAC so if that becomes their focus now I would think his stock to be on its way up.

He also go some eye surgery IIRC.Problem is that the line is sub-par and doesn't give Carr enough time to let the play develop and make the most use of AJ's skills.

The o-line-or lack of one-is a problem but if they're tossing short slants instead of lobbing bombs I would think Carr wouldn't need quite as much time.

 

[cstu]

I agree. This post that is getting lauded as "great analysis" is basically just irrelevant data mining. Grab any random football game and you can dig deeply enough and find some ridiculous stat that supports either team. This is the same type of post.

We are supposed to believe there is something magical about 24 year olds? Where's the analysis about the 33 year olds? I bet I can find something that suggests Marvin and Horn are going to drop off. It's pure coincidence, which should be obvious when noting that half the OP's list was injured and the rest, excluding Moss, simply happened to have below-average years in that one random season. Big deal.

What *would* be meaningful is if the OP showed the FBG top 15, compared his ranking of each of these 3, and explained why he has them ranked lower (and if the answer is "they are 24", we can all stop reading right there) and who he moved ahead of them and why. But as is, this post is hardly relevant, meaningful or insightful.

This post did not start out with me trying to find some magic age for WR's. I was actually just trying to redo my rankings and analyze the situations for these young WR's. I did check how young WR's have done in the past and see for yourself if there's a correlation: 1000 Yard Receivers by Age since 1995

Also, I chose 1995 as a starting point to be generous to young WR's - that seemed to be the point where a lot of young WR's started performing well.

 

[cstu]

What *would* be meaningful is if the OP showed the FBG top 15, compared his ranking of each of these 3, and explained why he has them ranked lower (and if the answer is "they are 24", we can all stop reading right there) and who he moved ahead of them and why.

I asked that question several posts back and have yet to receive an answer. To me, this is an extremely pertinent question. Since all of the WRs in question are being drafted as Top 15 WRs in most drafts than who is going to replace them in the Top 15 if they fall? It's one thing to say Player X, Y and Z may not live up to their billing; it's another to step up and identify which players are going to represent stronger Top 15 value.

BranchBoldin

Smith

Driver

Lelie

bassnbrewrules

Now we're getting somewhere. As for your list

Branch: I love the talent, but he can never stay healthy. If he can ever play a full 16-game season I do think he has Top 20 talent and possibly Top 15 fantasy potential.

Boldin: Absolutely a guy who could crack the Top 15. However, I have MAJOR concerns about Warner at QB and I think that will prevent Boldin from reaching that level.

Steve Smith: I'm a huge Smith fan and I absolutely agree he's a legit Top 15 talent.

Driver: I love the guy and I think he'll have another Pro Bowl-caliber season but I think he's sitting just outside the Top 15 range.

Lelie: A real up-and-comer but people continue to ignore Rod Smith and I think that's a mistake from a fantasy perspective. Smith will continue to get his and I think that will prevent Lelie from attaining Top 15 status.

Here are guys that I would consider drafting before themrew Bennett -

Reggie Wayne -

DJax -

Driver -

Steve Smith -

Ward -

Boldin - possibly, though I'm concerned about the QB situation

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

What *would* be meaningful is if the OP showed the FBG top 15, compared his ranking of each of these 3, and explained why he has them ranked lower (and if the answer is "they are 24", we can all stop reading right there) and who he moved ahead of them and why.

I asked that question several posts back and have yet to receive an answer. To me, this is an extremely pertinent question. Since all of the WRs in question are being drafted as Top 15 WRs in most drafts than who is going to replace them in the Top 15 if they fall? It's one thing to say Player X, Y and Z may not live up to their billing; it's another to step up and identify which players are going to represent stronger Top 15 value.

BranchBoldin

Smith

Driver

Lelie

bassnbrewrules

Now we're getting somewhere. As for your list

Branch: I love the talent, but he can never stay healthy. If he can ever play a full 16-game season I do think he has Top 20 talent and possibly Top 15 fantasy potential.

Boldin: Absolutely a guy who could crack the Top 15. However, I have MAJOR concerns about Warner at QB and I think that will prevent Boldin from reaching that level.

Steve Smith: I'm a huge Smith fan and I absolutely agree he's a legit Top 15 talent.

Driver: I love the guy and I think he'll have another Pro Bowl-caliber season but I think he's sitting just outside the Top 15 range.

Lelie: A real up-and-comer but people continue to ignore Rod Smith and I think that's a mistake from a fantasy perspective. Smith will continue to get his and I think that will prevent Lelie from attaining Top 15 status.

Here are guys that I would consider drafting before themrew Bennett -

Reggie Wayne -

DJax -

Driver -

Steve Smith -

Ward -

Boldin - possibly, though I'm concerned about the QB situation

Hines Ward and Drew Bennett before Burleson are mistakes IMHO. All those guys except DBennett before AJohn & Roy

 

[cstu]

What *would* be meaningful is if the OP showed the FBG top 15, compared his ranking of each of these 3, and explained why he has them ranked lower (and if the answer is "they are 24", we can all stop reading right there) and who he moved ahead of them and why.

I asked that question several posts back and have yet to receive an answer. To me, this is an extremely pertinent question. Since all of the WRs in question are being drafted as Top 15 WRs in most drafts than who is going to replace them in the Top 15 if they fall? It's one thing to say Player X, Y and Z may not live up to their billing; it's another to step up and identify which players are going to represent stronger Top 15 value.

BranchBoldin

Smith

Driver

Lelie

bassnbrewrules

Now we're getting somewhere. As for your list

Branch: I love the talent, but he can never stay healthy. If he can ever play a full 16-game season I do think he has Top 20 talent and possibly Top 15 fantasy potential.

Boldin: Absolutely a guy who could crack the Top 15. However, I have MAJOR concerns about Warner at QB and I think that will prevent Boldin from reaching that level.

Steve Smith: I'm a huge Smith fan and I absolutely agree he's a legit Top 15 talent.

Driver: I love the guy and I think he'll have another Pro Bowl-caliber season but I think he's sitting just outside the Top 15 range.

Lelie: A real up-and-comer but people continue to ignore Rod Smith and I think that's a mistake from a fantasy perspective. Smith will continue to get his and I think that will prevent Lelie from attaining Top 15 status.

Here are guys that I would consider drafting before themrew Bennett -

Reggie Wayne -

DJax -

Driver -

Steve Smith -

Ward -

Boldin - possibly, though I'm concerned about the QB situation

Hines Ward and Drew Bennett before Burleson are mistakes IMHO. All those guys except DBennett before AJohn & Roy

Ward had his worst season in four years last year and will be the legit #1 with Burress gone. While I'm not gung ho on Big Ben right now, Ward is an all-around great receiver and could easily get back up to his 10-12 TD production.The Drew Bennett thread has all my views on him. I just like the way the guy plays and his offense.

 

[PRS Guy]

Your sample size is way too small for there to be any statistical significance to what you are implying. There have only been 25 23 year old WR’s since 1960 that have had 1,000 yard seasons. By comparison, there have been 44 24 year old WR’s since 1960 that have had 1,000 yard seasons. Additionally, you state that “history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year.”In 1989, there were 5 24 year old WR’s that gained 1,000 yards. You can easily be accused of data mining even if that was not your intent, as you used a very limited data set to come your conclusion.This might be fun to talk about on the FBG’s message board, but statistically it is of no use.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

That's cool cstu. I just have Burlseon's season projected much higher.I'm not very high on D.Bennett myself.Pitts O in general is just gonna stink this year. He'll be double covered all season long, heck probably triple.

 

[cstu]

Your sample size is way too small for there to be any statistical significance to what you are implying.

There have only been 25 23 year old WR’s since 1960 that have had 1,000 yard seasons.

By comparison, there have been 44 24 year old WR’s since 1960 that have had 1,000 yard seasons.

Additionally, you state that “history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year.”



In 1989, there were 5 24 year old WR’s that gained 1,000 yards.

You can easily be accused of data mining even if that was not your intent, as you used a very limited data set to come your conclusion.

This might be fun to talk about on the FBG’s message board, but statistically it is of no use.

However, in the next 5 years (1990-1994) there were a total of two 24 year old WR’s that gained 1,000 yards.It is a small data set and may not be statistically valid but that's all there is to work with.

 

[Chase Stuart]

The list of the guys that have hit the 1,000 yard mark during their age 24 season:Lname Fname YearJohnson Andre 2004Burleson Nate 2004Boldin Anquan 2003Boston David 2001Jackson Darrell 2001Moss Randy 2000Crowell Germane 1999Bruce Isaac 1995Rison Andre 1990Toon Al 1986Lipps Louis 1985Clayton Mark 1984Jefferson John 1979Chandler Wes 1979Hill Tony 1979Walker Wesley 1978Pearson Drew 1974Washington Gene 1970Jackson Harold 1969Hawkins Ben 1967Sauer George 1966Hayes Bob 1965Alworth Lance 1963Turner Bake 1963Powell Art 1960

 

[Gerg73]

This post could've been Titled "Rookie WR's Roy Williams, Fitzgerald , Mike Clayton and Lee Evans Have no value because Rookie WR's don't produce"Last Year.You could've provided the SAME arguments and stats that you can find on 23 or 24 year olds.The FACT is...the NFL is changing. Players and especially WR's are picking up the game MUCH quicker now than ever before.I'm not saying all 3 will live up to their Draft positions, but to downgrade a player because he's 23 and in his 2nd-3rd year is just not soundf logic.ESPECIALLY when they've already shown they have the talent to produce.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

All three of them are ranked in the top 15 despite the fact that history does not support three WR's aged 24 gaining 1000 yards. Since 1990, there have been 15 WR's aged 24 who have gained 1000 yards - an average of one per year.

Good research, cstu, but I think you are misusing statistics to single out one attribute that points one way when there may be a great many other attributes that point the other way.For one thing, Burleson's production has nothing to do with Johnson's or Williams's or Clayton's or any other player not on the Vikings. It would be goofy to go through the following thought-process: Typically, only one 24-year-old gets 1,000 yards. I think Michael Clayton will get 1,000 yards this year, so I guess that means Burleson won't. If Clayton gets hurt tomorrow, does that magically increase Burleson's chances? No. They are independent of each other, and each guy should be projected on his own merits. It is no argument against Burleson that some people think Clayton or Johnson or Williams will get 1,000 yards. They have nothing to do with each other.

So let's consider Burleson in particular. Maybe it's historically a bad sign that he's 24 years old. Maybe it's historically a good sign that he's a Capricorn. Maybe it's historically a bad sign that he has four siblings. (How many WRs with four siblings have had 1,000 yards in the same year?) Maybe it's historically a good sign that his name starts with the letter N.

You can find all sorts of historical trends like that if you look for them. But they have no value if there's no causal mechanism at work. What causes a 24-year-old to be at a disadvantage vis-a-vis a 23-year-old? Probably nothing.

Twenty-four-year-olds in general may be at a disadvantage vis-a-vis 25-year-olds -- but we're not dealing with 24-year-olds in general. We're dealing with Nate Burleson et al.

Count Burleson's age as a small strike against him if you want. But then focus on much more important issues -- his talent, his QB, the offensive system he plays in, his role in the offense, his success last year, his speed, his hands, his route-running, etc. All of that stuff matters a lot more than his age.

I personally agree with you that Roy Williams is overrated. I disagree that Burleson is overrated -- he is a stud in a fantastic situation. I'm not sure about Andre Johnson. On his own merits, he r0x0rs, but I have reservations about Carr and the Texans' offense in general.

 

[cstu]

This post could've been Titled

"Rookie WR's Roy Williams, Fitzgerald , Mike Clayton and Lee Evans Have no value because Rookie WR's don't produce"

Last Year.

You could've provided the SAME arguments and stats that you can find on 23 or 24 year olds.

The FACT is...the NFL is changing. Players and especially WR's are picking up the game MUCH quicker now than ever before.

I'm not saying all 3 will live up to their Draft positions, but to downgrade a player because he's 23 and in his 2nd-3rd year is just not soundf logic.

ESPECIALLY when they've already shown they have the talent to produce.

I'm just not sold on the idea that NFL WR's have changed so radically in the past decade. The position is still a difficult one to master and there are so many variables that can lead to success or failure that expecting 3 (4 including Michael Clayton) very young WR's to produce top 15 numbers is too much. Could they all do it? Sure, but the probability is low. If they were in ideal situations I would be all for it, but I don't see it given the issues each of them has. They are all worth drafting at the right spot, I just prefer WR's who have more experience and better situations.