Biabreakable
Footballguy
Ok so he is 23 years old entering the NFL then not 24 correct?
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Official Josh Doctson - WR - Redskins (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter bud29
- Start date
bostonfred
Footballguy
So if he came out of college a year earlier after paying 65/1000/11, he'd be a stud. If he were born a month later, he'd be a stud.
But staying in school, posting 78/1326/14 and being a Sagittarius instead of a Capricorn means he's going to bust.
Makes sense.
But staying in school, posting 78/1326/14 and being a Sagittarius instead of a Capricorn means he's going to bust.
Makes sense.
gianmarco
Footballguy
Yes. He will be 23 when the season starts but turning 24 before the season ends. The lists above I listed are based on age on Dec 31st.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Well most of the analysis I have seen has been the players age at the time they were drafted. So that would be the data point we would use for comparison.
gianmarco
Footballguy
Right. So why didn't he come out last year? Why didn't he do this stuff when he was 18 or 19 years old like most other NFL caliber prospects? And maybe he put up 78/1326/14 because he's a 23 yo playing against mostly 18-21 year olds?
Again, look at the lists above. The same could be said for every player on that list. Over the last 10 years, when you look at ALL players that came into the league his age or older, for whatever reason, there is almost ZERO fantasy relevance. Doctson could very well be the exception. But again, this whole discussion came about because many were saying "age doesn't matter", especially when compared to Treadwell who is 3 yrs younger. History shows that age doesn't just matter, but it matters an incredibly significant amount.
But sure, you can spin it however you'd like to make you feel better about his prospects and ignore the data above.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
The data above is about WR who were 24 years old entering the league and players who were 21 years old.
Doctson will be 23 years old entering the league so the data above is not relevant to him.
BTW if Doctson is 23 years old then he must have been born in 1993. If he was born in 1992 he would be 24 years old. Because math.
Doctson will be 23 years old entering the league so the data above is not relevant to him.
BTW if Doctson is 23 years old then he must have been born in 1993. If he was born in 1992 he would be 24 years old. Because math.
gianmarco
Footballguy
His birthday is 12/3/92. That makes him 23 right now (not 24). He will not turn 24 until the later this year when another 9 months have passed. Because math. I'm not sure why you keep coming back to argue this as it's very simple math. With a birthday on December 3rd, 1992, he just turned 23 about 3 months ago on December 3rd, 2015. Because math.
Similarly, the data above is exactly what I said it was. If you go to profootball reference and use this link, it only allows you to search by age as of Dec 31st. Since Doctson will be 24 on Dec 31st, 2016, then that's the age I put in. So yes, the data is relevant to him and any other player that was 23 coming into the league whose birthday fell somewhere between Sept and Dec 31st thus turning 24 as well as any other players whose birthday was within those 12 months.
This isn't rocket surgery.
Last edited by a moderator:
JohnnyU
Footballguy
The Man With No Name
Footballguy
Jerry Rice was 23
Marvin Harrison was 24
Tim Brown was 23
Terrell Owens was 24
Derrick Mason was 24
Marvin Harrison was 24
Tim Brown was 23
Terrell Owens was 24
Derrick Mason was 24
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
Those are fair points.
But there are some fair rebuttals.
First, a cut off off 31st is arbitrary. He's 3 weeks away from not making your list. Is 3 weeks a lot or a little?
Second, the list of older players double counts the scouting discount for those guys a bit, but who were the top prospects in that list? Meachem and Avery were the only guys selected in the first two rounds, and both of them were speed guys with little else.
How many of those guys had combine numbers close to doctson's? Doctson is currently mocked between late first and early second, which means he will either be the highest or second highest drafted on this list.
And while it's a fair question why he didn't come out as a junior, the answer is simple - he had a chance to become a first or second round pick. Almost all of the guys on that list were day 3 picks or undrafted.
Your point is well taken, but if you made a list of people with his height/speed/agility/college production, you'd find a lot of good nfl players, too. So why is 3 weeks of age more meaningful than anything else about him?
But there are some fair rebuttals.
First, a cut off off 31st is arbitrary. He's 3 weeks away from not making your list. Is 3 weeks a lot or a little?
Second, the list of older players double counts the scouting discount for those guys a bit, but who were the top prospects in that list? Meachem and Avery were the only guys selected in the first two rounds, and both of them were speed guys with little else.
How many of those guys had combine numbers close to doctson's? Doctson is currently mocked between late first and early second, which means he will either be the highest or second highest drafted on this list.
And while it's a fair question why he didn't come out as a junior, the answer is simple - he had a chance to become a first or second round pick. Almost all of the guys on that list were day 3 picks or undrafted.
Your point is well taken, but if you made a list of people with his height/speed/agility/college production, you'd find a lot of good nfl players, too. So why is 3 weeks of age more meaningful than anything else about him?
Biabreakable
Footballguy
2016-1992 = 24
2016-1993 = 23
If Doctson is currently 23 years old and was born on December 3rd what year was he born in?
The draft occurs in May so what age will he be when he is drafted?
2016-1993 = 23
If Doctson is currently 23 years old and was born on December 3rd what year was he born in?
The draft occurs in May so what age will he be when he is drafted?
gianmarco
Footballguy
gianmarco
Footballguy
Every single point you listed is fair. And I don't disagree with any of them to be honest with you. If I had to guess, I would say that there's a good chance that Doctson becomes the 3rd relevant guy on that list.
Now, I never said that the 3 weeks of age is more meaningful than anything else about him. In fact, I made it quite clear to say that it should be taken in the whole scheme of things and not in isolation. What brought this whole subject up was the fact that there were people who were posting that the age thing didn't matter and asking why the 3 years of difference between Treadwell and Doctson is at all relevant. From that standpoint, I completely disagree because age does matter and I explained the reason why the age difference is relevant. And if you've got the 1.1 pick and are considering taking Doctson over Treadwell, which some people have talked about doing, then knowing that one guy is on a list with 50% success rate and the other guy is on a list with < 1% success rate matters even if you don't fully agree with the arbitrary cutoffs of those lists. That is such a HUGE discrepancy in both directions that ignoring it as if it's meaningless is foolish. What you choose to do with that info is up to you.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Gian the way you are sparsing the data is not something I think is fair at all. It contradicts your earlier post that recognizes Docson as 23 years old and Green, Benjamin being other recent examples.
I brought up John Brown who was 24 years old when drafted and you provide an excellent example of selection bias in how you partitioned the data. Yet somehow you are now talking about Doctson as a 24 year old player entering the league when this is not the case.
I do not care who is right about this, I just want the right answer.
If Doctson is 23 years old then you should not be comparing him to players who were 24. Your most recent post categorizes Doctson as being in a group with < 1% instead of comparing him to the 23 year old group that just earlier today you acknowledged he was a part of.
I brought up John Brown who was 24 years old when drafted and you provide an excellent example of selection bias in how you partitioned the data. Yet somehow you are now talking about Doctson as a 24 year old player entering the league when this is not the case.
I do not care who is right about this, I just want the right answer.
If Doctson is 23 years old then you should not be comparing him to players who were 24. Your most recent post categorizes Doctson as being in a group with < 1% instead of comparing him to the 23 year old group that just earlier today you acknowledged he was a part of.
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
For those of us who can read, Gian Marcos analysis compares players who turn 24 before their rookie year is complete, more specifically he used 12/31 of rookie year. Doctson will be 24 before 12/31 of his rookie year. However, the exact date has little relevance to the point which is that younger player who dominate the competition more often translate to relevant fantasy starters than older players who dominate their mostly younger competition.
Some of you just love to argue for the sake of arguing. In this case you're arguing meaningless aspects of the analysis. It's pretty intuitive to know that younger players who stand out are going to have a higher rate of success at the next level, whatever that next level is. High school athletes who start varsity in 9th and 10th grade are probably going to have better success in college than those who don't. These are not absolutes but they are guidelines that Have probability on their side.
Some of you just love to argue for the sake of arguing. In this case you're arguing meaningless aspects of the analysis. It's pretty intuitive to know that younger players who stand out are going to have a higher rate of success at the next level, whatever that next level is. High school athletes who start varsity in 9th and 10th grade are probably going to have better success in college than those who don't. These are not absolutes but they are guidelines that Have probability on their side.
gianmarco
Footballguy
It's not meant to contradict anything. As I stated above, pro football reference allows you to separate age by only 1 date -- Dec 31st. I didn't choose the date. I can't change it. And I'm certainly not going to go through a list of 300-400 names and figure out whose birthdays fell from Sept-Dec and move them manually onto another list.
The date is what it is and treats every single player drafted in the last 10 years the exact same way. Even if you shift the date from 12/31 back to 8/31, it's still looking at a very similar list of players. It's not my selection bias and it's not how I partitioned the data. And even if he's entering the league at 23, the fact remains that he turns 24 very shortly afterward. Plus, there are 122 names on the list when you do ONLY age 24. Any of those guys that have a birthday that falls between Sept 1st (start of the season) and Dec 31st that were similarly 23 like Doctson will be when this year starts are also being classified on the 24 year old list. Since that's 4 months worth of birthdays, then it's very likely that 1/3rd of the 122 names, or 40 players are in the same age range as him (entering at 23 and turning 24 at some point during the season). Those 40 guys are still on that list and that is not a small sample size as it's still larger than the 2nd list I showed above. And the fact remains that those 40 guys are still fantasy irrelevant: Victor Cruz is actually in that subset as he was also 23 and turned 24 in November of his 1st year just like Doctson will.
This is why those getting up in arms about the "arbitrary" cut off aren't making as much sense. I didn't choose that date to lump him in with a lower quality group of players. Now, you can try and pull some guys from the 23 year old list that have birthdays between Jan and April to even it out the other way, but again, I'm not going through the 23 year old list that has 300 names and checking birthdays on each of those players.
As for the age thing, there's no "ifs" about it. I've clarified it over and over. His birthday is 12/3/92. He is currently 23 years old. He will still be 23 years old in a couple months when he's drafted. He will still be 23 years old when the season starts but he will be turning 24 near the end of the season when it's 12/3/16. There is no longer any confusion about his age based on his own twitter account that I posted.
I'm sorry this is different than the first list I posted earlier today but when I actually used PFR's data querier, I was able to get much more information and the difference is even bigger than I had initially thought. I'm not sure why you're so fixated on the earlier post that was just a cursory search based on some current top players.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
Most of the analysis I have seen is based on the players age when they were drafted not what age they were during their rookie season. In this case Docstson being 23 years old for the majority of the season before he turns 24.
Just because PFR set up this cut off does not mean the way you are using it is a good way to group Doctson or any players age.
Just because PFR set up this cut off does not mean the way you are using it is a good way to group Doctson or any players age.
gianmarco
Footballguy
Here's another way to look at it.
If I compared Doctson to all other players born on Dec 3rd, then I'm going to get the best answer to how he might compare age wise. Problem is that the sample size will be ridiculously small or non-existent. If I extend it one month in both directions (born Nov to Jan), then I get a better representation and increase the sample size. The more I extend it, the larger the sample size but the less relevant the players on each end become.
Ideally, I'd like to extend it 6 months in each direction to look at a full year: Players who turn 24 between July (training camp) of their rookie year (the oldest players) through players that turn 24 by June after their rookie year (the youngest players). In that group, every single player would be within 6 months of age of Doctson who turns 24 in December of his rookie year and you'd maximize your sample size and Doctson would be right in the middle of that age group.
Unfortunately, I don't have a way to query based on that date so we had to use 12/31 which is the least advantageous date for him. But still, half of the sample size of 160 players on that list should fall within 6 months of his birthday (turning 24 between July and Dec) so it's still a very reasonable comparison given the number of players on the list as that's an n=80. It would be a different story if we only had a list of 10 players. So, even if we only use half the list, there's still only 2 players on that list of relevance out of 80 (all born within 6 months of him) compared to 14 players of relevance on a smaller list of 30 players in the other list: ~1.5% vs. ~50%.
Thus, even if we were to include another 100 names from players born between January and June that are currently on the 23 year old list, there's no chance they could be successful enough to make the combination of the 2 anywhere close to as successful as the 21 year old list. It may increase from ~1% success rate to 10% or maybe even 20% if almost half the guys hit (just guessing here), but that's still significantly lower than the 50% on the 21 year old list. That's why I'm saying whatever cutoff you use really doesn't matter that much in the long run because you're still mostly comparing apples to apples and the sample size is large enough to give you a good idea of what's going on there.
If I compared Doctson to all other players born on Dec 3rd, then I'm going to get the best answer to how he might compare age wise. Problem is that the sample size will be ridiculously small or non-existent. If I extend it one month in both directions (born Nov to Jan), then I get a better representation and increase the sample size. The more I extend it, the larger the sample size but the less relevant the players on each end become.
Ideally, I'd like to extend it 6 months in each direction to look at a full year: Players who turn 24 between July (training camp) of their rookie year (the oldest players) through players that turn 24 by June after their rookie year (the youngest players). In that group, every single player would be within 6 months of age of Doctson who turns 24 in December of his rookie year and you'd maximize your sample size and Doctson would be right in the middle of that age group.
Unfortunately, I don't have a way to query based on that date so we had to use 12/31 which is the least advantageous date for him. But still, half of the sample size of 160 players on that list should fall within 6 months of his birthday (turning 24 between July and Dec) so it's still a very reasonable comparison given the number of players on the list as that's an n=80. It would be a different story if we only had a list of 10 players. So, even if we only use half the list, there's still only 2 players on that list of relevance out of 80 (all born within 6 months of him) compared to 14 players of relevance on a smaller list of 30 players in the other list: ~1.5% vs. ~50%.
Thus, even if we were to include another 100 names from players born between January and June that are currently on the 23 year old list, there's no chance they could be successful enough to make the combination of the 2 anywhere close to as successful as the 21 year old list. It may increase from ~1% success rate to 10% or maybe even 20% if almost half the guys hit (just guessing here), but that's still significantly lower than the 50% on the 21 year old list. That's why I'm saying whatever cutoff you use really doesn't matter that much in the long run because you're still mostly comparing apples to apples and the sample size is large enough to give you a good idea of what's going on there.
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
Yeah I can see that. Good discussion and well laid out points. Thanks for sharing.
gianmarco
Footballguy
So, I went ahead and looked at the 23 year old list on PFR. That is, guys who were 23 years of age on 12/31 of their rookie year. I'm not going to post the whole list here, but here's the link:
--There are 214 names on that list
--By my estimation, there are 17 names on that list with any kind of significant fantasy relevance: AJ Green, Demaryius Thomas, Colston, K. Benjamin, D. Bowe, G. Jennings, TY Hilton, Michael Floyd, Martavis Bryant, Jordy Nelson, J. Edelman, Mike Wallace, Tampa Mike, Doug Baldwin, A. Hurns, Tyler Lockett, K. Wright.
-- That's an 8% hit rate for 23 year olds. Obviously better than 24+ but well below 21
-- I looked at the birthdays of those 17 players. 13/17 are over 6 months younger than Doctson will be in his rookie year (i.e. birthdays after June 3rd) so would not be included in the list of players that are 23 when drafted (they all turn 23 AFTER June 3rd so they were actually 22 when drafted). Most of them have birthdays that make them almost a full year younger than (10 of the 13 born Sept or later, i.e. were 22 and then turned 23 after the season starts).
--The 4 players that fall within 6 months of Doctson (born Jan 1st to June 3rd) that didn't make my other list -- K. Benjamin, J. Nelson, J. Edelman, Tampa Mike.
--Without going through all 214 birthdays, assuming about 40% of those 214 have birthdays that fall between Jan 1st to June 3rd (about 5 months), that's about 90 players. Only 4 of those 90 players have fantasy relevance or about 4.5%. If you combine it with the previous list I showed, that's 6 players out of 170 (2 out of roughly 80 on the previous list + 4 out of roughly 90 on this list), or 3.5%.
--While not perfect, this is looking at players all that were 23 as of June 3rd (when they were drafted) and turned 24 sometime between between Jun 4th of their rookie year to June 3rd after their rookie year. That looks at all players over the last 10 years that are either 6 months younger to 6 months older than Josh Doctson when they came into the league. That's your ideal group.
--3.5% is certainly better than 1%, but it's SIGNIFICANTLY lower than the ~50% of the 21 year old age group and not surprising that it's not much better. Even if you looked at the players 23+ and include players that are almost a full year younger than Doctson, the hit rate is substantially lower than younger groups. And that's being generous with a few of those names (Hurns, Wright, Baldwin).
--There are 214 names on that list
--By my estimation, there are 17 names on that list with any kind of significant fantasy relevance: AJ Green, Demaryius Thomas, Colston, K. Benjamin, D. Bowe, G. Jennings, TY Hilton, Michael Floyd, Martavis Bryant, Jordy Nelson, J. Edelman, Mike Wallace, Tampa Mike, Doug Baldwin, A. Hurns, Tyler Lockett, K. Wright.
-- That's an 8% hit rate for 23 year olds. Obviously better than 24+ but well below 21
-- I looked at the birthdays of those 17 players. 13/17 are over 6 months younger than Doctson will be in his rookie year (i.e. birthdays after June 3rd) so would not be included in the list of players that are 23 when drafted (they all turn 23 AFTER June 3rd so they were actually 22 when drafted). Most of them have birthdays that make them almost a full year younger than (10 of the 13 born Sept or later, i.e. were 22 and then turned 23 after the season starts).
--The 4 players that fall within 6 months of Doctson (born Jan 1st to June 3rd) that didn't make my other list -- K. Benjamin, J. Nelson, J. Edelman, Tampa Mike.
--Without going through all 214 birthdays, assuming about 40% of those 214 have birthdays that fall between Jan 1st to June 3rd (about 5 months), that's about 90 players. Only 4 of those 90 players have fantasy relevance or about 4.5%. If you combine it with the previous list I showed, that's 6 players out of 170 (2 out of roughly 80 on the previous list + 4 out of roughly 90 on this list), or 3.5%.
--While not perfect, this is looking at players all that were 23 as of June 3rd (when they were drafted) and turned 24 sometime between between Jun 4th of their rookie year to June 3rd after their rookie year. That looks at all players over the last 10 years that are either 6 months younger to 6 months older than Josh Doctson when they came into the league. That's your ideal group.
--3.5% is certainly better than 1%, but it's SIGNIFICANTLY lower than the ~50% of the 21 year old age group and not surprising that it's not much better. Even if you looked at the players 23+ and include players that are almost a full year younger than Doctson, the hit rate is substantially lower than younger groups. And that's being generous with a few of those names (Hurns, Wright, Baldwin).
Last edited by a moderator:
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
Who is Tampa Mike?
Ray Barboni
Footballguy
Mike Williams - not the fat one, the decent one. Had a really nice rookie and sophomore year - fell off a cliff after that.
dint think he's in the league anymore but I don't know.
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
Right, I got it now. Wow, I'm getting old.
Borden
Footballguy
I think the difference between what you're comparing in age is off in the case of Doctson. The typical older RS senior has a college career that goes. RS because he's not ready year one. Year 2 just start to get on the field. Year 3, 4, 5 climbing the depth chart.
Doctson ran slow for a Texas kid coming out of high school and didn't get much recruiting love. *At the combine I think he proved he's not slow* So he went to Wyoming were he started and led his team as a true freshman. Then his grandfather got sick and he moved back to Texas to be with his family. His mom worked at TCU so he got a discount on tuition to go there and he was a "walk on" to the TCU team. He had to sit out a year because of transfer rules. He didn't transfer because he got in trouble.
I think that why Doctson is an older player is important. Because it's not the typical situation that an older player enters the NFL. There's no doubt that Doctson saw the benefits of the extra time but the difference is that it's not what made him. He's not the product of being in a system for so long. You can assume this because he led Wyoming as a true freshman. Is this a major selling point? No but it is at least what you would expect him to do.
Did Doctson see the benefits of the extra time? No doubt. But so did AJ Green. This is what makes Doctson special though. He's developed the skill of elite receivers. The way he does it might be the result of extra time but it's also something that the many of the 21 yo studs don't. It literally makes him special. The fact that he tested out well at the combine was major plus for him because his game is based somewhat on technical skill and smarts. Don't get me wrong, he's not Julio.
I'm sure some people might say "That's all good and he's a good player but I'd take the young hyped stud in Treadwell." I will address this because I have Doctson over Treadwell. And because this thread has been one of the most civil conversations of different opinions. Treadwell didn't test out as well at the combine. ZWK has serious warning flags about Treadwell from a numbers view. On tape what you see with Treadwell is a guy that looks like beast however he doesn't get a lot of separation, he doesn't win enough jump balls, he doesn't consistently catch enough balls and he doesn't have elite speed. He's being billed like he's Julio or Dez but he's not. Both Doctson and Treadwell I think are end of the first (NFL) types of talent. I take Doctson over Treadwell because I think at worst Doctson can be a jump ball/red zone guy. Treadwell at worst is a slower possession WR. I don't think either of them are busts of course but it's something to consider.
Doctson ran slow for a Texas kid coming out of high school and didn't get much recruiting love. *At the combine I think he proved he's not slow* So he went to Wyoming were he started and led his team as a true freshman. Then his grandfather got sick and he moved back to Texas to be with his family. His mom worked at TCU so he got a discount on tuition to go there and he was a "walk on" to the TCU team. He had to sit out a year because of transfer rules. He didn't transfer because he got in trouble.
I think that why Doctson is an older player is important. Because it's not the typical situation that an older player enters the NFL. There's no doubt that Doctson saw the benefits of the extra time but the difference is that it's not what made him. He's not the product of being in a system for so long. You can assume this because he led Wyoming as a true freshman. Is this a major selling point? No but it is at least what you would expect him to do.
Did Doctson see the benefits of the extra time? No doubt. But so did AJ Green. This is what makes Doctson special though. He's developed the skill of elite receivers. The way he does it might be the result of extra time but it's also something that the many of the 21 yo studs don't. It literally makes him special. The fact that he tested out well at the combine was major plus for him because his game is based somewhat on technical skill and smarts. Don't get me wrong, he's not Julio.
I'm sure some people might say "That's all good and he's a good player but I'd take the young hyped stud in Treadwell." I will address this because I have Doctson over Treadwell. And because this thread has been one of the most civil conversations of different opinions. Treadwell didn't test out as well at the combine. ZWK has serious warning flags about Treadwell from a numbers view. On tape what you see with Treadwell is a guy that looks like beast however he doesn't get a lot of separation, he doesn't win enough jump balls, he doesn't consistently catch enough balls and he doesn't have elite speed. He's being billed like he's Julio or Dez but he's not. Both Doctson and Treadwell I think are end of the first (NFL) types of talent. I take Doctson over Treadwell because I think at worst Doctson can be a jump ball/red zone guy. Treadwell at worst is a slower possession WR. I don't think either of them are busts of course but it's something to consider.
BigTex
Don't mess with Texas
Kevin White, Cam Newton, Cordarrelle Patterson, Aaron Rodgers, Jaelen Strong, Keyshawn Johnson, O.J. Simpson, Corey Dillon, Brandon Jacobs, LeGarrette Blount, Chad Ochocinco, Steve Smith, Jeremy Shockey, and a few others will disagree with you.gianmarco said:
Tex
Rhythmdoctor
Footballguy
spider321
Footballguy
spider321
Footballguy
Do you even read, bro?
Kevin White, Cam Newton, Cordarrelle Patterson, Aaron Rodgers, Jaelen Strong, Keyshawn Johnson, O.J. Simpson, Corey Dillon, Brandon Jacobs, LeGarrette Blount, Chad Ochocinco, Steve Smith, Jeremy Shockey, and a few others would ALL AGREE that the vast majority of guys with NFL-level talent don't go to JC or leave school and come back later, because it's true.
spider321
Footballguy
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
Last edited by a moderator:
bostonfred
Footballguy
Treadwell, Doctson and Coleman could get taken in any order in any draft, including the NFL draft. They're all really strong prospects and the momentum will swing back and forth until draft day.
Andy Dufresne
Footballguy
Yep. I have the 1 & 2 picks in one draft and landing spots could complicate/clarify the choices.
Hankmoody
Footballguy
Same. My lean is toward Treadwell so him going to the best opportunity would make it real easy. Coleman could muck it all up.
Snorkelson
Footballguy
Then there are the guys who are dominating in high school and as young college players like Trent Richardson and jadaveon clowney. Those guys dominated as 18-19 yr olds, but the production didn't translate. No reason doctson can't be the next Steve smith. A guy coming in at 23 vs 21 means you probably get less of a chance, at 21 they feel you may still develop if the first couple years don't work out. At 23 you have to make it happen immediately. You aren't getting a 5-6 yr window, with maybe 2 teams. You get a 1-3 yr window and if it isn't working hope a team takes a chance in a 27 yr old wr. The data is scewed because of course a player coming out young has done well and is probably drafted higher and given a better chance because of what a team invested. That list seems selective as well, where are the Charles Rogers and mike Williams guys? Not going back that far maybe..
Snorkelson
Footballguy
Sry posted that forgot I was a page behind in reading....late to the party
spider321
Footballguy
gianmarco's data is not skewed or selective. It is the data.
I get that some of you don't like it. That's fine.
Can Dotson end up being a great player? Sure.
Has any WR who turned 24 during their rookie season turned out to be a great player? Probably, but not in the last 10 years.
More often than not, stop signs are painted red and white. Who wants to argue that one?
Last edited by a moderator:
Bracie Smathers
Footballguy
Matt Harmon, of 'Reception Perception' fame, says that Doc 'could' be the first WR taken in the draft depending on the workout of Laquon Treadmill and mentions Detroit with the 16th pick seems like a good fit.
Go to a little past the 8-minute mark where the Irish host asks Matt about the high SPARQ score of Josh Doctson then hear Harmon's response on the overall athleticism of the WR group and specifically his take on Doc.
Harmon goes over some of the other top WRs in the draft and WRs in free agency along with his non-WR fantasy takes.
The reason I found his take on Doctson interesting is because of Harmon's work with Reception Perception which has earned him some respect as a WR guru of sorts since many of the WRs of last year's draft class and the young WRs taken in previous drafts that he pegged to do well or break did well.
http://overtimeireland.com/
OTIPodcast #192 w/ Matt Harmon
March 2, 2016OTIPodcast #192 w/ Matt Harmon
March 2, 2016
Go to a little past the 8-minute mark where the Irish host asks Matt about the high SPARQ score of Josh Doctson then hear Harmon's response on the overall athleticism of the WR group and specifically his take on Doc.
Harmon goes over some of the other top WRs in the draft and WRs in free agency along with his non-WR fantasy takes.
The reason I found his take on Doctson interesting is because of Harmon's work with Reception Perception which has earned him some respect as a WR guru of sorts since many of the WRs of last year's draft class and the young WRs taken in previous drafts that he pegged to do well or break did well.
http://overtimeireland.com/
OTIPodcast #192 w/ Matt Harmon
March 2, 2016OTIPodcast #192 w/ Matt Harmon
March 2, 2016
NFL.com's Matt Harmon notes that TCU WR Josh Doctson was targeted on 41.6% of the 206 routes the analyst charted.
Doctson logged a catch on a fantastic 31.1% of his routes--higher than that of Baylor wideout Corey Coleman (30.6%), who was the next highest by Harmon's estimation. The 6-foot-4, 190-pounder flashed fantastic athleticism at the NFL Scouting Combine a shade over a week ago and SB Nation's Arif Hassan has logged him with a 90.7-percent similarity score to Odell Beckham. Not perfect, but close. While Coleman's been hampered by injury during the pre-draft season and Laquon Treadwell opted not to run the 40-yard dash in Indianapolis, Doctson's been checking every box to this point, turning himself into a near-lock for the first round in the process.
Source: Backyard Banter
Mar 8 - 8:51 PM
