Targets by position by team... (1 Viewer)

[JayMan]

Obvisouly. targets is an important variable in order to project players stats... How to predict 4 catches per game for Heath Miller if the Steelers target TEs only 3.4 times per game?...

With that in mind... I have gathered a bit of information that I wanted to pass along... some explanations:

Target stats are from FBG;
Numbers shown here are a weighted average of the last 3 seasons;
weighted average is: ( 3 * '06 + 2 * '05 + 1 * '04 ) / 6;By team:

Team---WR---RB---TE---AllARI--25.1--6.6--3.7--35.4ATL--13.8--4.9--7.2--25.9BAL--16.9--6.1--8.9--31.9BUF--19.3--4.5--3.0--26.8CAR--20.0--7.2--4.0--31.2CHI--17.9--6.1--5.1--29.1CIN--23.4--5.8--3.4--32.6CLE--16.6--5.1--8.3--30.0DAL--18.7--4.7--7.0--30.4DEN--17.8--5.3--5.4--28.5DET--21.1--8.2--4.9--34.2GB---22.1--9.2--6.9--38.2HOU--17.6--6.7--3.9--28.2IND--20.9--5.2--7.1--33.2JAX--18.2--6.1--4.8--29.1KC---15.1--5.9--8.7--29.7MIA--22.2--5.5--7.5--35.2MIN--17.8--7.6--6.9--32.3NE---18.6--6.6--7.2--32.4NO---19.5--9.7--5.1--34.3NYG--17.2--6.6--8.2--32.0NYJ--19.5--5.4--4.1--29.0OAK--19.4--6.7--6.4--32.5PHI--17.9-10.0--7.0--34.9PIT--19.1--5.0--3.4--27.5SD---13.8--6.7--9.0--29.5SEA--20.9--4.9--5.1--30.9SF---14.6--7.6--5.1--27.3STL--25.3--8.8--2.3--36.4TB---17.1--9.1--5.2--31.4TEN--17.5--5.3--8.8--31.6WAS--16.1--6.1--7.1--29.3

All...Top5 / Bottom5:

GB---38.2STL--36.4ARI--35.4MIA--35.2PHI--34.9HOU--28.2PIT--27.5SF---27.3BUF--26.8ATL--25.9

WRs...Top5 / Bottom5:

STL--25.3ARI--25.1CIN--23.4MIA--22.2GB---22.1WAS--16.1KC---15.1SF---14.6ATL--13.8SD---13.8

RBs...Top5 / Bottom5:

PHI-10.0NO---9.7GB---9.2TB---9.1STL--8.8PIT--5.0SEA--4.9ATL--4.9DAL--4.7BUF--4.5

TEs...Top5 / Bottom5:

SD---9.0BAL--8.9TEN--8.8KC---8.7CLE--8.3ARI--3.7CIN--3.4PIT--3.4BUF--3.0STL--2.3

 

[Bri]

I don't see a big disparity, what are you gaining then?

Not being "wise"

I'm missing something and appreciate the time spent researching, please clarify

 

[JayMan]

I don't see a big disparity, what are you gaining then?Not being "wise"I'm missing something and appreciate the time spent researching, please clarify

General guidance... you see that Cards and Rams WRs get over 25 targets while Falcons WRs usually get less than 14 looks per game... I'm certain it affects their stats (You'll certainly tell me that we already knew that - we do - but it confirms the info)...

 

[Bri]

I don't see a big disparity, what are you gaining then?Not being "wise"I'm missing something and appreciate the time spent researching, please clarify

General guidance... you see that Cards and Rams WRs get over 25 targets while Falcons WRs usually get less than 14 looks per game... I'm certain it affects their stats (You'll certainly tell me that we already knew that - we do - but it confirms the info)...

that's cool, thanksProbably Eagles RB targets in that realm tooDid anything stand out to you that maybe you hadn't noticed before?

 

[JayMan]

I don't see a big disparity, what are you gaining then?Not being "wise"I'm missing something and appreciate the time spent researching, please clarify

General guidance... you see that Cards and Rams WRs get over 25 targets while Falcons WRs usually get less than 14 looks per game... I'm certain it affects their stats (You'll certainly tell me that we already knew that - we do - but it confirms the info)...

that's cool, thanksProbably Eagles RB targets in that realm tooDid anything stand out to you that maybe you hadn't noticed before?

Few interesting observationsolphins WRs in the top5 with over 22 targets / game;Colts WRs not in the top5;Steelers WRs with more targets than the Cowboys WRs - for example;Eagles WRs accounting for only 50% of the targets - same for Chargers / Chiefs / Falcons;Titans TEs in the top5 with more targets than the Chiefs, Browns, Giants, Falcons, Redskins & Cowboys;Jaguars TEs with les than 5 targets per game... what does that mean for '07?... same for Rams TEs and less than 3 targets;

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Its cool and I thank you for doing it. But not real sure I can use it for anything.

 

[John Mamula]

Eagles WRs accounting for only 50% of the targets - same for Chargers / Chiefs / Falcons;

pretty obvious trend that poor WRs ---> less targets for the WRs ---> more targets for other positions like TE ---> Stud TE

 

[JayMan]

Eagles WRs accounting for only 50% of the targets - same for Chargers / Chiefs / Falcons;

pretty obvious trend that poor WRs ---> less targets for the WRs ---> more targets for other positions like TE ---> Stud TE

But...Dolphins WRs in the top5 with over 22 targets / game;Colts WRs not in the top5;Steelers WRs with more targets than the Cowboys WRs;Titans TEs in the top5 with more targets than the Chiefs, Browns, Giants, Falcons, Redskins & Cowboys.I wouldn't have guessed it in the first place...

 

[John Mamula]

Eagles WRs accounting for only 50% of the targets - same for Chargers / Chiefs / Falcons;

pretty obvious trend that poor WRs ---> less targets for the WRs ---> more targets for other positions like TE ---> Stud TE

But...Dolphins WRs in the top5 with over 22 targets / game;Colts WRs not in the top5;Steelers WRs with more targets than the Cowboys WRs;Titans TEs in the top5 with more targets than the Chiefs, Browns, Giants, Falcons, Redskins & Cowboys.I wouldn't have guessed it in the first place...

agree. let me clarify..i meant that from your data it becomes obvious that the teams with low WR targets result in good TEs. not that it was necessarily already obvious and that you shouldn't have done it.good stuff.

 

[Biabreakable]

Nice work Jayman.

I will be looking over this some more as I think it is useful information.

I am curious about the reasoning behind your use of the weighted average? Why this formula?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Tennessee #3 at TE...hmmmm

 

[DA RAIDERS]

nice work jayman

 

[JayMan]

Nice work Jayman. I will be looking over this some more as I think it is useful information.I am curious about the reasoning behind your use of the weighted average? Why this formula?

Thanks!I thought about this weighted average only to give more importance to the '06 season (3 times more than the '04 season actually) since it should give a better idea for '07 numbers... while not only looking at last year and wanting to look at longer trends (3 years)... just a thought I had - nothing scientific...

 

[JayMan]

Tennessee #3 at TE...hmmmm

Indeed... the Titans have been focusing on their TEs alot (just look at the '05 numbers below!)... it simply has not panned out (or they are not using them as much as other teams in the RZ - would have to look at that) when you look at their TD totals in comparison to their targets/receptions... (name, year, targets, receptions, yards, tds)

Bo Scaife------2006-56-29-370-2Ben Troupe-----2006-29-13-150-2Ben Hartsock---2006-15--6--68-0Cooper Wallace-2006--1--1---6-0Ben Troupe-----2005-80-55-530-4Erron Kinney---2005-72-55-543-2Bo Scaife------2005-56-37-273-2Gregg Guenther-2005--2--1---5-0Ben Troupe-----2004-52-33-329-1Shad Meier-----2004-36-25-127-2Erron Kinney---2004-30-25-193-3

 

[ShadowMaster]

Few interesting observationsolphins WRs in the top5 with over 22 targets / game;Colts WRs not in the top5;Steelers WRs with more targets than the Cowboys WRs - for example;Eagles WRs accounting for only 50% of the targets - same for Chargers / Chiefs / Falcons;Titans TEs in the top5 with more targets than the Chiefs, Browns, Giants, Falcons, Redskins & Cowboys;Jaguars TEs with les than 5 targets per game... what does that mean for '07?... same for Rams TEs and less than 3 targets;

I think the WEIGHTED average is throwing these stats off. Miami is hardly a top passing unit the past 3 years, and we know Indy is. I'd like to see this same analysis without the formula applied. I think you would have more valid data (at least for the teams that did not change coaches).Changes in coaching staff and philosophy are also in play when you look at 3 year trends. Again, I think you weight formula is skewing your data.Nice start - get back to work and let us know what you find.....

 

[JayMan]

Few interesting observations:

Dolphins WRs in the top5 with over 22 targets / game;

Colts WRs not in the top5;

Steelers WRs with more targets than the Cowboys WRs - for example;

Eagles WRs accounting for only 50% of the targets - same for Chargers / Chiefs / Falcons;

Titans TEs in the top5 with more targets than the Chiefs, Browns, Giants, Falcons, Redskins & Cowboys;

Jaguars TEs with les than 5 targets per game... what does that mean for '07?... same for Rams TEs and less than 3 targets;

I think the WEIGHTED average is throwing these stats off. Miami is hardly a top passing unit the past 3 years, and we know Indy is. I'd like to see this same analysis without the formula applied. I think you would have more valid data (at least for the teams that did not change coaches).Changes in coaching staff and philosophy are also in play when you look at 3 year trends. Again, I think you weight formula is skewing your data.

Nice start - get back to work and let us know what you find.....

You would rather use a simple average?... just asking... cause then the '04 season will have as much influence as the '06 season... 3 year average yields... MIA WRs: 21.4 trg/gm (4th)... and IND: 21.3 (5th)

Dolphins:

2006-Chris Chambers--1542006-Wes Welker--1002006-Marty Booker--902006-Derek Hagan--372006-Marcus Vick--12006-Cliff Russell--12005-Chris Chambers--1662005-Marty Booker--862005-Wes Welker--522005-Bryan Gilmore-202005-David Boston--102004-Chris Chambers--1312004-Marty Booker--1012004-Derrius Thompson--462004-Bryan Gilmore--312004-Ronald Bellamy--2

Colts:

2006-Marvin Harrison--1482006-Reggie Wayne--1372006-Aaron Moorehead--162006-Brandon Stokley--112006-Ricky Proehl--42005-Marvin Harrison--1322005-Reggie Wayne--1222005-Brandon Stokley--672005-Troy Walters--192005-Aaron Moorehead--112004-Marvin Harrison--1382004-Reggie Wayne--1132004-Brandon Stokley--992004-Aaron Moorehead--32004-Brad Pyatt--22004-Troy Walters--1

 

[Biabreakable]

Nice work Jayman. I will be looking over this some more as I think it is useful information.I am curious about the reasoning behind your use of the weighted average? Why this formula?

Thanks!I thought about this weighted average only to give more importance to the '06 season (3 times more than the '04 season actually) since it should give a better idea for '07 numbers... while not only looking at last year and wanting to look at longer trends (3 years)... just a thought I had - nothing scientific...

Ok well in percentages your weighted average is 50% 2006 33.3% 2005 16.7% 2004. Just found this method of weighting averages to be interesting. I do think it is significant enough to put a hurt on a team that was missing a significant player who missed time in 2006 but will be back to full utility in 2007

 

[Biabreakable]

Few interesting observationsolphins WRs in the top5 with over 22 targets / game;Colts WRs not in the top5;Steelers WRs with more targets than the Cowboys WRs - for example;Eagles WRs accounting for only 50% of the targets - same for Chargers / Chiefs / Falcons;Titans TEs in the top5 with more targets than the Chiefs, Browns, Giants, Falcons, Redskins & Cowboys;Jaguars TEs with les than 5 targets per game... what does that mean for '07?... same for Rams TEs and less than 3 targets;

I think the WEIGHTED average is throwing these stats off. Miami is hardly a top passing unit the past 3 years, and we know Indy is. I'd like to see this same analysis without the formula applied. I think you would have more valid data (at least for the teams that did not change coaches).Changes in coaching staff and philosophy are also in play when you look at 3 year trends. Again, I think you weight formula is skewing your data.Nice start - get back to work and let us know what you find.....

Chambers has had a huge ammount of targets over the last 3 years with last year actualy being his lowest of the 3 years.I do not think the weighting is skewing the numbers in reference to the Dolphins who have thrown the ball a ton but have not had a good completion percentage.The Colts on the other hand often will audible to running plays as the defense aligns itself to try to stop the pass so often. They have a high completion percentage so they do not need to throw the ball as much as the Dolphins to have better results.Some of the high target numbers for teams such as the Dolphins stem from having to make so many more attempts to get completions. And also from playing from behind increasing total pass attempts.

 

[JayMan]

Nice work Jayman. I will be looking over this some more as I think it is useful information.I am curious about the reasoning behind your use of the weighted average? Why this formula?

Thanks!I thought about this weighted average only to give more importance to the '06 season (3 times more than the '04 season actually) since it should give a better idea for '07 numbers... while not only looking at last year and wanting to look at longer trends (3 years)... just a thought I had - nothing scientific...

Ok well in percentages your weighted average is 50% 2006 33.3% 2005 16.7% 2004. Just found this method of weighting averages to be interesting. I do think it is significant enough to put a hurt on a team that was missing a significant player who missed time in 2006 but will be back to full utility in 2007

I find that it is a useful weighted average method in my field of work (stock analysis)... where the denominator is the sum of the n values (1+2+3+...+n) and where the least important numerator value as weight of 1, second least 2... up to the most important value as a weight of n...Thus, for 3 values... 3*x / (1+2+3)... and 2*y / (1+2+3)... and 1*z / (1+2+3)