Reading through the lies...1st rounder rookie WR stats (1 Viewer)

[Captain Spaulding]

Sometime stats lie to us in fantasy football. Particularly when we sit here at the post season looking back at the final statistics of the high draft pick rookie WR's and try to project which ones will be progressing into the higher tiers of studom and which aren't going anywhere but to the 3rd or 4th string.

Well my theory is you have to pay much more attention into what you see by watching the games than crunching the stats. Which rookie WR's were true reliable offensive targets on most of their catches that were attempts to get a first down in a key game situation. If you find the QB from the team targeting the rookie, chances are they are going to be the real-deal down the road. If the rookie is getting most of his receiving statistics on either deep fly routes down the sidelines or screen passes, those are the red flag guys to be careful of. Owners/coaches selected a WR in the 1st round and are paying big bucks. Each game, for business reasons, they have to "force" some simple plays to these receivers them to see what they can do with the ball. The 2 most simple plays are the go pattern down the sideline or the screen. If the rookie more often than not is getting these routes to compile the bulk of receiving stats, then tread cautiously.

If you are going to look at stats, obviously TD's are most important, followed probably by # of receptions per game. Be leary of the guy who gets 5 or 6 catches a game with a very low YPC though and low TD's. Screen passes forced / no moves.

Also be leary of the 1-2 catch per game guy with a high YPC avg on the year. That guy is just getting a jumpball down the sideline and occasionally is making a play.

You want the progressive guy getting 5 plus receptions most games, moderate TD's, and makes key 3rd down catches.

Not sure if I made my point but anyway hopefully there is some logic and use here.

 

[Giants4Life]

My theory is to draft the best WR at the time of the pick

 

[switz]

Sometime stats lie to us in fantasy football. Particularly when we sit here at the post season looking back at the final statistics of the high draft pick rookie WR's and try to project which ones will be progressing into the higher tiers of studom and which aren't going anywhere but to the 3rd or 4th string.

Well my theory is you have to pay much more attention into what you see by watching the games than crunching the stats. Which rookie WR's were true reliable offensive targets on most of their catches that were attempts to get a first down in a key game situation. If you find the QB from the team targeting the rookie, chances are they are going to be the real-deal down the road. If the rookie is getting most of his receiving statistics on either deep fly routes down the sidelines or screen passes, those are the red flag guys to be careful of. Owners/coaches selected a WR in the 1st round and are paying big bucks. Each game, for business reasons, they have to "force" some simple plays to these receivers them to see what they can do with the ball. The 2 most simple plays are the go pattern down the sideline or the screen. If the rookie more often than not is getting these routes to compile the bulk of receiving stats, then tread cautiously.

If you are going to look at stats, obviously TD's are most important, followed probably by # of receptions per game. Be leary of the guy who gets 5 or 6 catches a game with a very low YPC though and low TD's. Screen passes forced / no moves.

Also be leary of the 1-2 catch per game guy with a high YPC avg on the year. That guy is just getting a jumpball down the sideline and occasionally is making a play.

You want the progressive guy getting 5 plus receptions most games, moderate TD's, and makes key 3rd down catches.

Not sure if I made my point but anyway hopefully there is some logic and use here.

Well, I think you made your first mistake with the bold print. TDs are the hardest stat to predict, or draw conclusions from. Ignore them completely when judging a WR IMO.

 

[Modog814]

Sometime stats lie to us in fantasy football. Particularly when we sit here at the post season looking back at the final statistics of the high draft pick rookie WR's and try to project which ones will be progressing into the higher tiers of studom and which aren't going anywhere but to the 3rd or 4th string.

Well my theory is you have to pay much more attention into what you see by watching the games than crunching the stats. Which rookie WR's were true reliable offensive targets on most of their catches that were attempts to get a first down in a key game situation. If you find the QB from the team targeting the rookie, chances are they are going to be the real-deal down the road. If the rookie is getting most of his receiving statistics on either deep fly routes down the sidelines or screen passes, those are the red flag guys to be careful of. Owners/coaches selected a WR in the 1st round and are paying big bucks. Each game, for business reasons, they have to "force" some simple plays to these receivers them to see what they can do with the ball. The 2 most simple plays are the go pattern down the sideline or the screen. If the rookie more often than not is getting these routes to compile the bulk of receiving stats, then tread cautiously.

If you are going to look at stats, obviously TD's are most important, followed probably by # of receptions per game. Be leary of the guy who gets 5 or 6 catches a game with a very low YPC though and low TD's. Screen passes forced / no moves.

Also be leary of the 1-2 catch per game guy with a high YPC avg on the year. That guy is just getting a jumpball down the sideline and occasionally is making a play.

You want the progressive guy getting 5 plus receptions most games, moderate TD's, and makes key 3rd down catches.

Not sure if I made my point but anyway hopefully there is some logic and use here.

Well, I think you made your first mistake with the bold print. TDs are the hardest stat to predict, or draw conclusions from. Ignore them completely when judging a WR IMO.

I agree for the most part. But I don't think you should ignore them completely if the majority of them are coming in the red zone. That could mean that they are big and physical enough to be a red zone target and already have some gained some of the QB's confidence. Long TD's that rely on great blocking, missed tackles or whatever can not be relied upon. Short TD's (Red Zone TD's) show the ability to get open in limited space.Basically,

If you have a choice between two 2nd year Players (for sake of argument let's say they have identical situations)

Player A's rookie year: 50 rec 600yds 7 Tds (all within the RZ)

Player B's rookie year: 50 rec 850yds 7 Tds (5 were 40+ yards)

I'd say Player A would be more likely to duplicate/improve on his rookie season in all aspects, including TD's.

 

[bearsharks]

I would go by total targets and red zone targets.

 

[The Man With No Name]

And just how many rookies have ever gotten 5+ receptions most games?

 

[beto]

I was expecting some analysis of the last couple of rook classes?

Do we have to go to your pay website to see this?

 

[SSOG]

Well, I think you made your first mistake with the bold print. TDs are the hardest stat to predict, or draw conclusions from. Ignore them completely when judging a WR IMO.

Don't ignore them COMPLETELY. For instance, we know that Terrell Owens is going to outscore Torry Holt at this point. We also know that Larry Fitzgerald is going to outscore Anquan Boldin. In some cases, scoring TDs is an actual demonstrable skill as opposed to simple variation due to sample size. In most cases, though, I agree that it's mostly just sample size.

 

[tribecalledjeff]

Sometime stats lie to us in fantasy football. Particularly when we sit here at the post season looking back at the final statistics of the high draft pick rookie WR's and try to project which ones will be progressing into the higher tiers of studom and which aren't going anywhere but to the 3rd or 4th string.

Well my theory is you have to pay much more attention into what you see by watching the games than crunching the stats. Which rookie WR's were true reliable offensive targets on most of their catches that were attempts to get a first down in a key game situation. If you find the QB from the team targeting the rookie, chances are they are going to be the real-deal down the road. If the rookie is getting most of his receiving statistics on either deep fly routes down the sidelines or screen passes, those are the red flag guys to be careful of. Owners/coaches selected a WR in the 1st round and are paying big bucks. Each game, for business reasons, they have to "force" some simple plays to these receivers them to see what they can do with the ball. The 2 most simple plays are the go pattern down the sideline or the screen. If the rookie more often than not is getting these routes to compile the bulk of receiving stats, then tread cautiously.

If you are going to look at stats, obviously TD's are most important, followed probably by # of receptions per game. Be leary of the guy who gets 5 or 6 catches a game with a very low YPC though and low TD's. Screen passes forced / no moves.

Also be leary of the 1-2 catch per game guy with a high YPC avg on the year. That guy is just getting a jumpball down the sideline and occasionally is making a play.

You want the progressive guy getting 5 plus receptions most games, moderate TD's, and makes key 3rd down catches.

Not sure if I made my point but anyway hopefully there is some logic and use here.

Well, I think you made your first mistake with the bold print. TDs are the hardest stat to predict, or draw conclusions from. Ignore them completely when judging a WR IMO.

I agree for the most part. But I don't think you should ignore them completely if the majority of them are coming in the red zone. That could mean that they are big and physical enough to be a red zone target and already have some gained some of the QB's confidence. Long TD's that rely on great blocking, missed tackles or whatever can not be relied upon. Short TD's (Red Zone TD's) show the ability to get open in limited space.Basically,

If you have a choice between two 2nd year Players (for sake of argument let's say they have identical situations)

Player A's rookie year: 50 rec 600yds 7 Tds (all within the RZ)

Player B's rookie year: 50 rec 850yds 7 Tds (5 were 40+ yards)

I'd say Player A would be more likely to duplicate/improve on his rookie season in all aspects, including TD's.

I think switz's point was that TDs are inconsistent, no matter where they are coming from. I completely agree - of course I do play ppr which makes a big difference. For examplelayer A 2007 (his 4th year): 82-1129-2 #23 in fbg scoring

Player B 2007 (his 2nd year): 53-920-12 #12 in fbg scoring

I am MUCH more comfortable taking player A next year as a WR2 than player B. B had over 20% of his catches for TDs - that doesn't happen often. Both TDs will tend to regress to the mean, and Player A will be undervalued while player B is overvalued. There are very few guys that you can count on for double digit TDs year in and year out. For the rest of the general population, they fluctuate a lot.

Player A is Cotchery

Player B is Jennings