What's new
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!

Towards an Objective Measure of Talent in WRs (1 Viewer)

Dinsy Ejotuz

Footballguy
About 18 months ago I read the Football Prospectus article on developing an objective measure of talent for 1st and 2nd round QBs coming out of college. It made me curious about whether something similar could be done for other fantasy football relevant players, i.e. skill positions. I posted a first go at the RBs last August and will be updating that research with some minor improvements and simplifications soon.

In the meantime, here are the summary findings for the WRs.

The first important point is that in my opinion it's impossible to accurately predict WRs not drafted early in the first round. NFL scouts whiff on about half of the WRs they deem worth spending a top-21 pick on. And after that, it's a back alley crapshoot. If they can't do it, and there's no after-the-fact way to sort them into categories I don't think it can be done - with one exception, which I'll post below.

What I think can be done is to sort the WRs chosen in the early 1st round into pools.

As I said above, if a WR isn't taken in the first 21 picks I'm not trying to rate them. So that eliminates the majority of WRs taken each year. In addition, I'm not trying to account for WRs who aren't one of the 1st four off the board or those who attended a non-BCS conference. That's based on my findings - it's not arbitrary - but those extra criteria only eliminate the following WRs from what I'm calling the prospect pool (top 21 pick who are also one of the first four WRs picked):

Michael Clayton - 5th WR taken

Kevin Dyson - non-BCS conference

Ashley Lelie - non-BCS conference

Sylvester Morris - non-BCS conference

Given Clayton's performance in his rookie year, eliminating guys who manage to get drafted in the 1st 21 picks, but not as one of the first four WRs may be arbitrary. So you can include him in the results below if you want to. I confess that I just liked how clean the elite pool was without him.

After eliminating all the guys I don't believe can be rated, here's the prospect pool:

Andre Johnson

Braylon Edwards

Bryant Johnson

Calvin Johnson

Charles Johnson

Charles Rogers

David Boston

David Terrell

Donte' Stallworth

Eddie Kennison

Ike Hilliard

J.J. Stokes

Javon Walker

Joey Galloway

Johnnie Morton

Keyshawn Johnson

Koren Robinson

Larry Fitzgerald

Lee Evans

Marvin Harrison

Matt Jones

Michael Westbrook

Mike Williams

Peter Warrick

Plaxico Burress

Randy Moss

Reggie Williams

Rod Gardner

Roy Williams

Santana Moss

Tedd Ginn

Terry Glenn

Torry Holt

Travis Taylor

Troy Williamson

Yatil Green

All of those players, plus the four I've already cut, were deemed worthy of a very valuable draft pick by at least one NFL team. Roughly half of them failed to justify that pick under any criteria. But if you look at only those taken in the first eight picks the hit rate gets better, thirteen of seventeen developed into at least solid starters. So credit where it's due I guess.

(For what it's worth...I almost didn't post either of my findings because I doubted I could be right about something that a multi-billion dollar industry hadn't figured out. But after playing with the data for long enough I'm pretty sure I'm onto something. Granted that I have the major advantage of knowing where a player was drafted, but in today's NFL there aren't many surprises and I'm pretty sure that most of the time you know roughly which WRs will go in the early part of the first round. So now I just think they should have done better.)

Enough preliminaries, I guess. The main thing I found is that a highly-drafted WR's success is largely driven by simple physics: weight and Body Mass Index.

Light WR = <190 pounds

Medium WR = 191-209 pounds

Heavy WR = 210+ pounds

Slight WR = BMI of <25.7

Average BMI = BMI of 25.8 to 27.9

Thick WR = BMI of 28.0+

So, using only weight, BMI, draft position and major-conference program, here are my findings:

Slight Receivers (any weight):

Roy Williams

Torry Holt

Tedd Ginn

Marvin Harrison

Randy Moss

Thick Receivers (any weight):

Calvin Johnson

Andre Johnson

Lee Evans

Larry Fitzgerald

Light Receivers (average BMI):

Santana Moss

Terry Glenn

Joey Galloway

Heavy Receivers, 1st or 2nd WR taken (average BMI):

Michael Westbrook

Keyshawn Johnson

Braylon Edwards

David Terrell

Plaxico Burress

Koren Robinson

David Boston

Everyone Else

Mike Williams

Reggie Williams

J.J. Stokes

Rod Gardner

Javon Walker

Bryant Johnson

Matt Jones

Yatil Green

Troy Williamson

Charles Rogers

Eddie Kennison

Travis Taylor

Ike Hilliard

Donte' Stallworth

Charles Johnson

Peter Warrick

Johnnie Morton

To summarize: I'd call the Thick and Slight guys in the first 21 picks the truly elite prospects. The Light WRs and the Heavy WRs that are the 1st or 2nd WR picked are good bets, but as a group not as good as the ones with the desirable BMIs.

A couple disclaimers...

Finding accurate weights is tricky, and I was planning to go back and try to standardize the sources I used. But I've been sitting on this for six months messing with the RB findings and I'm not sure when I'll do that now. I am worried though that some of the weights I'm using are playing weights, rather than combine weights (i.e. those that would be available at the time of the draft).

Randy Moss technically shouldn't qualify since he went to Marshall. But he was recruited to a major school (Florida State). You're on your own judging whether character issues are enough to nix a guy.

Ted Ginn was a really tough call. He fits the slight profile perfectly, but many people felt the Dolphins reached for him (i.e. that he wouldn't have been drafted in the first 21 picks if they hadn't done it) and there's only one other WR in the prospect pool that is also both slight and weighs less than 190 - Marvin Harrison.

Something that I noticed with RBs is that the NFL is in love with BIG players. There's a bias against guys who are perfectly qualified, but smaller by NFL standards. You see it here with the average BMI WRs who weigh more than 210 pounds. Some of the guys that fit that profile who were taken as the 1st or 2nd WR washed out, and almost all the 210+ average BMI guys who were taken as the 3rd or 4th WR busted.

Finally, there's one notable exception to my belief that WRs not in my prospect pool above can't be predicted. Major conference guys taken until the middle of the 3rd round (or so) who have a BMI of 28.0 or greater are worth a shot. They include:

Anquan Boldin

Chris Chambers

Deion Branch

Dez White

Jerry Porter

Darrell Jackson

Other than that there's not much you can do with the later drafted guys except to focus on those who have at least one desirable attribute (thick or slight or light) who land in good situations.

I'm not sure why these criteria matter, but I strongly suspect it has something to do with ability to get open. The thick/heavy guys can get off the jam and use their body for position, while the slight/light guys can make stronger cuts and get separation.

I'll try and answer any questions, but am not sure I can say much more than I've got here. Again, I want to repeat that there's on big caveat to this - if a player's playing weights differs from his weight at the combine this falls apart to some degree in terms of looking ahead. But even then it should still provide some guidance and, in my opinion at least, goes a long way towards explaining why some highly-rated receivers succeed while others, rated just as highly, fail.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Couple things I forgot. First, I'd call the Thick and Slight guys in the first 21 picks the truly elite prospects. The light and heavy 1st/2nd guys are good bets, but as a group not as good as the ones with the desirable BMIs.

And you should never take a WR that's both average weight and average BMI.

And thinking about this from an NFL team perspective...

If you were willing to spend a very high draft pick on a WR you'd only ever want to do it for an elite prospect (high/low BMI). The light or heavy + 1st/2nd guys might be worth a first rounder, but not a top ten pick. After that, I'd just wait. So much of a WRs prospects are down to QB, offense, work ethic, and intangibles that it really is a crapshoot after the first couple are gone. And there's only one or two really great prospects most years.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm curious... if you did the Slight/Thick only for even just the 2nd and 3rd rounds, which WRs would you have ended up?

It'd be interesting to see if that would also lead to "sleeper" picks in the 2nd and 3rd round that would prove to be just as good as players taken with the same concept in the first 21 picks. I understand there's a bigger hit/miss in that area but I think it'd be worth seeing if the concept can be stretched out past the 1st round (or if there's a different correlation altogether in the 2nd and 3rd).

 
Thick works (see bottom of my original post). Slight or light has a better hit rate than medium weight and average BMI (seriously, stay away from these guys unless they get drafted by the 2007 Pats or 2004 Colts), but they're still longshots.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm curious to see where this year's WR prospects drafted in Rd. 1 fall in these categories.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Here's a list of some of the WR's who fit the "ideal" category (now to wait on where they are drafted)

Height/Weight from ESPN.com

- Slight (< 25.0)

DJ Hall (25.00)

Keenan Burton (25.00)

James Hardy (24.80)

Jason Rivers (24.30)

Todd Blythe (24.10)

DeSean Jackson (22.50)

- Light (< 190)

Donnie Avery (190)

Davone Bess (190)

Jason Rivers (189)

DeSean Jackson (166)

 
Here's a list of some of the WR's who fit the "ideal" category (now to wait on where they are drafted)Height/Weight from ESPN.com- Slight (< 25.0)DJ Hall (25.00)Keenan Burton (25.00)James Hardy (24.80)Jason Rivers (24.30)Todd Blythe (24.10)DeSean Jackson (22.50)- Light (< 190)Donnie Avery (190)Davone Bess (190)Jason Rivers (189)DeSean Jackson (166)
Bowman and Sweed don't fall into either of these?
 
Here's a list of some of the WR's who fit the "ideal" category (now to wait on where they are drafted)Height/Weight from ESPN.com- Slight (< 25.0)DJ Hall (25.00)Keenan Burton (25.00)James Hardy (24.80)Jason Rivers (24.30)Todd Blythe (24.10)DeSean Jackson (22.50)- Light (< 190)Donnie Avery (190)Davone Bess (190)Jason Rivers (189)DeSean Jackson (166)
Bowman and Sweed don't fall into either of these?
Both of those guys would fall into the "heavy plus avg BMI" category (per espn profiles). I believe thats one of the good categories depending on draft position.
 
I'm curious to see where this year's WR prospects drafted in Rd. 1 fall in these categories.
Here are the 2007 1st rounders. Note that technically only CJ & Ginn fall within the parameters of his study. However, Bowe is just two picks out from his top 21 criteria:Calvin Johnson (2) - ThickTed Ginn (10) - Slight-----------------------------------------Dwayne Bowe (23) - ThickRobert Meachem (27) - heavy/avg BMICraig Davis (30) - medium/avg BMIGonzo (32) - medium/avg BMIOther guys of note Jarrett (heavy/avg BMI) & Rice (slight).
 
Here's a list of some of the WR's who fit the "ideal" category (now to wait on where they are drafted)Height/Weight from ESPN.com- Slight (< 25.0)DJ Hall (25.00)Keenan Burton (25.00)James Hardy (24.80)Jason Rivers (24.30)Todd Blythe (24.10)DeSean Jackson (22.50)- Light (< 190)Donnie Avery (190)Davone Bess (190)Jason Rivers (189)DeSean Jackson (166)
Bowman and Sweed don't fall into either of these?
Adarius Bowman: 220 lbs and 26.80 BMI.Limas Sweed: 219 lbs. and 26.0 BMIMalcolm Kelly: 219 lbs. and 26.70 BMIEarly Doucet: 210 lbs. and 27.70 BMI
 
Hey Dawn, you've got it right on the big guys. If any of those big guys are the 1st or 2nd WR taken they'd be worth a flier, but none of them are 'thick' so I don't think they're slam dunks.

And you only put each WR in one category... light and heavy are only for those with an average BMI.

Oh... and I think there are a few limits to this. If Desean Jackson is really 166 he may be too small. But I've recently seen him listed at 178/179. Also, none of the WRs that actually did anything were over about 6'4" or under 5'9". Does that mean Calvin Johnson's not going to be good? Probably not. Does it mean he might not be AS good as we think? Maybe. And Sinorice Moss is thick and drafted just out of the good range. But he's only 5'8". What does that mean? I don't know.

btw... some of the WW guys I've tried to scoop up are Roy Hall (thick and on an all world passing team, but drafted very late), Chad Jackson (thick, just out of the right draft position and on an all world passing team) and Jason Avant (thick, good QB, but drafted early 4th).

Oh ... and Marcus Colston? Thick - BMI of 28.1. I'd have had him on every team I own if I'd finished this a year earlier. There aren't very many of those in any given year and they're all worth watching. Especially those that could possibly be relative unknowns for one reason or another (like Hall who played behind three 1st round WRs at OSU).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey Dawn, you've got it right on the big guys. If any of those big guys are the 1st or 2nd WR taken they'd be worth a flier, but none of them are 'thick' so I think they're dodgy.

And you only put each WR in one category... light and heavy are only for those with an average BMI.
Ah, sorry about that. I'm curious, let's say that an Adarius Bowman weighs in at the Combine and suddenly fits the "thick" category. Granted, the ESPN height/weight is a somewhat iffy statistic (no idea if it's measured at the start of the year and kept or what) but does that raise flags at all or does it just cement Bowman as a solid prospect worthy of picking up (pending draft position)?Here's a list of the players in the categories (Note: Unlike wdcrob, I've put players into more than one category so be aware of that). It goes Weight/BMI

Light and Slight

DeSean Jackson (California)

Jason Rivers (Hawaii)

Light and Average

Donnie Avery (Houston)

Davone Bess (Hawaii)

Medium and Slight

Todd Blythe (Iowa State)

DJ Hall (Alabama)

Keenan Burton (Kentucky)

Medium and Average

Curtis Hamilton (Western Kentucky)

Kevin Robinson (Utah State)

Andre Caldwell (Florida)

Earl Bennett (Vanderbilt)

Heavy and Slight

Ernie Wheelwright (Minnesota)

James Hardy (Indiana)

Heavy and Average

Mario Urrutia (Louisville)

Adarius Bowman (Oklahoma State)

Jabari Arthur (Akron)

Jordy Nelson (Kansas State)

Early Doucet (LSU)

Heavy and Thick

Jeremy Trimble (Army)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ah, sorry about that. I'm curious, let's say that an Adarius Bowman weighs in at the Combine and suddenly fits the "thick" category. Granted, the ESPN height/weight is a somewhat iffy statistic (no idea if it's measured at the start of the year and kept or what) but does that raise flags at all or does it just cement Bowman as a solid prospect worthy of picking up (pending draft position)?
I wish I knew, but I'd trust the combine #s more than anything else at this point.This is the potential pitfall with my model. The weights you find are sometimes all over the map. And BMI can change a lot with plus/minus five pounds. I don't think the NFL will slim many guys down, so not many guys will move from average BMI to slight after getting into the league. But some will beef up enough to get to thick. IIRC Hines Ward did that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Couple things I forgot. First, I'd call the Thick and Slight guys in the first 21 picks the truly elite prospects. The light and heavy 1st/2nd guys are good bets, but as a group not as good as the ones with the desirable BMIs.
Thanks for the reminder. I added this in a later post, but will go back and add it to the main one.
 
There is some interesting work here, but you have to acknowledge that you're curve-fitting--in particular, there's no reason to expect that heavy WRs behave differently if they're chosen as the third or later pick, relative to the other kinds of WRs. You've come up with a decent model for what's happened in the past, but I don't think it's likely to predict future events any better than, say, straight-up draft position.

 
There is some interesting work here, but you have to acknowledge that you're curve-fitting--in particular, there's no reason to expect that heavy WRs behave differently if they're chosen as the third or later pick, relative to the other kinds of WRs. You've come up with a decent model for what's happened in the past, but I don't think it's likely to predict future events any better than, say, straight-up draft position.
Yea, I mostly agree with this. There is definitely some merit to the idea that success is largely a matter of physics. I've often said in the past that function follows form. That's one of the reasons why I continually harp on body type as an important consideration when evaluating a RB prospect. Almost all of the best RBs in the NFL are 5'9"-6'1" and 205-235 pounds. There is a relatively narrow range of body types that can be successful. However, it's a somewhat different ball game at WR. Steve Smith, Randy Moss, Marvin Harrison, and Terrell Owens are all elite WRs and they're all radically different in terms of body type and playing style. I think it's clear that the range of body types that can be successful at WR is far broader than it is at RB, so I think placing too much emphasis on WR body type as a predictor of success could be somewhat misguided.Look at someone like Troy Williamson, Freddie Mitchell, or Quincy Morgan. I don't believe that their failure can be attributed to body type so much as a lack of necessary intangibles (i.e. the ability to catch the football). When I look at a WR prospect these days, one of the first things I try to figure out is if he has a good set of hands and can consistently catch the ball smoothly. This isn't something that can be found in the numbers.
 
There is some interesting work here, but you have to acknowledge that you're curve-fitting--in particular, there's no reason to expect that heavy WRs behave differently if they're chosen as the third or later pick, relative to the other kinds of WRs. You've come up with a decent model for what's happened in the past, but I don't think it's likely to predict future events any better than, say, straight-up draft position.
I think that GMs rate big players more highly than they should. Or at least they do with RBs and WRs. Guys with marginal talent get drafted, and sometimes drafted highly, for only one reason - they're big. All I'm doing here is saying that big receivers who don't have the 'right' BMI need to be discounted a bit. They might be good, but they might just be big.That's my rationale, at least. It's possible that it's wrong. But between this research and the stuff I did with RBs I really believe NFL scouts overvalue size.I think the better argument for curve-fitting is tossing out Michael Clayton.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear said:
There is some interesting work here, but you have to acknowledge that you're curve-fitting--in particular, there's no reason to expect that heavy WRs behave differently if they're chosen as the third or later pick, relative to the other kinds of WRs. You've come up with a decent model for what's happened in the past, but I don't think it's likely to predict future events any better than, say, straight-up draft position.
I wasn't going to include this stuff because I think it'll just confuse people, but...I calculated a metric for all of the WRs taken in the 1st 80 picks between 1994 and 2005. Basically a WR gets one point if they finish in the top 28 in terms of fantasy football points and two points if they finish in the top 14. Sum the points and divide by years of experience to get Points/Year.

Here are the correlations for the players in my 'prospect pool' (N=34). Note that I've eliminated the distinction for Heavy WRs 1/2 vs 3/4.

Points/Year regressed against binary variables for Thick, Heavy, Slight and Light body types (medium weight/average BMI is the baseline):

Adjusted R^2 = .56, Correlation = .79

And here are the Coefficients and T-stats for each body type...

Heavy - Coefficient = 0.21, T-stat = 1.53

Light - Coefficient = 0.51, T-stat = 2.41

Slight - Coefficient = 1.15, T-stat = 5.72

Thick - Coefficient = 0.71, T-stat = 3.14

Here's the same regression for Points/Year vs Draft Position:

Adjusted R^2 = (-.02) i.e. draft position is irrelevant within this group

(Adding back the 1/2 vs 3/4 split for heavy WRs with average BMI bumps the Adjusted R^2 to .66 and the Correlation to .83)

Finally, here are the relevant correlations for thick players OUTSIDE my prospect pool (WRs outside top 21 picks, and non-BCS WRs) (N=89)

Points/Year regressed against a binary variable for the Thick body type:

Adjusted R^2 = .07, Correlation .29

Thick - Coefficient = .28, T-stat 2.83

and

Points/Year vs Draft position: Adjusted R^2 = (.01) i.e. draft position is irrelevant within this group

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wouldn't the more comprehensive approach with respect to trying to define/measure "body type(s)" & "NFL production/success" be simply to first look at all of the NFL top producers at sort them by body type? Top producers could be Top 30 at the position, or look cumulatively at the top 100 producers over the last 10 years (beyond that perhaps there have been "changes" to the game). This would establish via the largest pool of players is there is a "Body Type(s)" that is more likely to have success. Then you simply have a filter with which to compare against new draftees. If Mike Williams body type (heavy but average BMI) has a very low representation in the cumulative 10 year player pool, than that becomes a negative filter.

The quant jocks at Football Prospectus could probably build a multi-variable model that would also build in Combine metrics such as 40 yard time, vertical leap, shuttle time. Unfortunately there is not a good metric that rates "hands" and "route running".

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Wouldn't the more comprehensive approach with respect to trying to define/measure "body type(s)" & "NFL production/success" be simply to first look at all of the NFL top producers at sort them by body type? The quant jocks at Football Prospectus could probably build a multi-variable model that would also build in Combine metrics such as 40 yard time, vertical leap, shuttle time. Unfortunately there is not a good metric that rates "hands" and "route running".
Draft position takes 40-times, route running and hands into account. Imperfectly, it's true. But they're in there.On the RB study I did exactly what you suggested above. Started with the elite performers and went from there. I did the same thing with the WRs, but it didn't yield anything obvious at first, so I abandoned it.After a lot of flailing around what finally helped me with the WRs was just having some sort of gut intuition that Roy Williams, Randy Moss and Marvin Harrison had something physical in common. And that the same was true for Larry Fitzgerald, Andre Johnson and Calvin Johnson. It took me a long time to figure out that what I was 'seeing' was BMI, but once I did everything fell into place.Since you suggested it though, I just went back and checked the top 12 WRs in career FF Points Scored from 1981-2007 (FBG standard scoring).Here they are along with the physical 'type' they fit into according to my model:Jerry Rice (BMI 25.7 - slight)Chris Carter (BMI 25.2 - slight)Tim Brown (BMI 26.2 - medium/average)Marvin Harrison (BMI 23.7 - slight)Terrell Owens (BMI 28.2 - thick)Randy Moss (BMI 24.2 - slight)Isaac Bruce (BMI 25.5 - slight)Andre Reed (BMI 24.4 - slight)Irving Fryar (BMI 27.1 - medium/average)Henry Ellard (BMI 25.1 - slight)Jimmy Smith (BMI 28.1 - thick)Torry Holt (BMI 25.8 - slight)So only two of the top dozen WRs in the last 25+ years have had BMIs between 25.9 and 27.9. And both of those two played for 17 years to get onto the top 12 list.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
CalBear said:
There is some interesting work here, but you have to acknowledge that you're curve-fitting--in particular, there's no reason to expect that heavy WRs behave differently if they're chosen as the third or later pick, relative to the other kinds of WRs. You've come up with a decent model for what's happened in the past, but I don't think it's likely to predict future events any better than, say, straight-up draft position.
There are plenty of reasons. Draft position is the result of a lot of different variables, any one of which could account for that disparity. Maybe heavy WRs will only succeed if they're also fast, and any heavy/fast WRs will go in the top 21 picks (meaning high heavy picks succeed and low heavy picks fail).
 
There is some interesting work here, but you have to acknowledge that you're curve-fitting--in particular, there's no reason to expect that heavy WRs behave differently if they're chosen as the third or later pick, relative to the other kinds of WRs. You've come up with a decent model for what's happened in the past, but I don't think it's likely to predict future events any better than, say, straight-up draft position.
Yea, I mostly agree with this. There is definitely some merit to the idea that success is largely a matter of physics. I've often said in the past that function follows form. That's one of the reasons why I continually harp on body type as an important consideration when evaluating a RB prospect. Almost all of the best RBs in the NFL are 5'9"-6'1" and 205-235 pounds. There is a relatively narrow range of body types that can be successful. However, it's a somewhat different ball game at WR. Steve Smith, Randy Moss, Marvin Harrison, and Terrell Owens are all elite WRs and they're all radically different in terms of body type and playing style. I think it's clear that the range of body types that can be successful at WR is far broader than it is at RB, so I think placing too much emphasis on WR body type as a predictor of success could be somewhat misguided.

Look at someone like Troy Williamson, Freddie Mitchell, or Quincy Morgan. I don't believe that their failure can be attributed to body type so much as a lack of necessary intangibles (i.e. the ability to catch the football). When I look at a WR prospect these days, one of the first things I try to figure out is if he has a good set of hands and can consistently catch the ball smoothly. This isn't something that can be found in the numbers.
I thought Michael Jenkins should have been a great WR - 6-4, 220, 4.4, ran good routes, clutch hands. There are some things you just can't measure.
 
Just wanted to let people know that in the end I'm pretty sure I figured this out. I've got an article in the 2008 Football Prospectus next month that explains it. I'll have a lot more to say after the article is published - including what you can do to separate the good from the bad AFTER they've qualified on the model's core piece.

 
You can give us a list of players who fit your mold without giving away your mold.

Might be good :coffee: material.

 
Q: Is Brown a better receiver than people think?Andy Reid: I think he's pretty good. He's quick. He can change direction, accelerate fast, and those are things that normally make you successful in this offense.Ron Jaworski (can't find the exact quote - thought I'd bookmarked it): Reggie Brown could still surprise people. He's always open on the film. (again, I'm paraphrasing)What's interesting about those two quotes (tying Brown back to the topic) is that what I think I've found is a quantitative way to ID guys who can get open. And Brown fits the model. He may never be a FF WR1, but even when you include his performance to date I can't find any reason he won't be a legit #1 WR in the NFL and a FF #2. Given his current ranking b/w 35 and 40 he's a screaming buy.Leaving Brown for a minute - what is 100% clear is that for #1 WRs speed is almost irrelevant once you're below 4.65-4.7 in the forty. It's all about GETTING OPEN - and that's not based on speed.
 
Q: Is Brown a better receiver than people think?Andy Reid: I think he's pretty good. He's quick. He can change direction, accelerate fast, and those are things that normally make you successful in this offense.

Ron Jaworski (can't find the exact quote - thought I'd bookmarked it): Reggie Brown could still surprise people. He's always open on the film. (again, I'm paraphrasing)

What's interesting about those two quotes (tying Brown back to the topic) is that what I think I've found is a quantitative way to ID guys who can get open. And Brown fits the model. He may never be a FF WR1, but even when you include his performance to date I can't find any reason he won't be a legit #1 WR in the NFL and a FF #2. Given his current ranking b/w 35 and 40 he's a screaming buy.

Leaving Brown for a minute - what is 100% clear is that for #1 WRs speed is almost irrelevant once you're below 4.65-4.7 in the forty. It's all about GETTING OPEN - and that's not based on speed.
Great points in bold. When Jaws speaks I listen and 40yd time does not = getting open with pads on during game time. :goodposting:

But I also listen when EBF speaks :lmao:

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Couple things I forgot. First, I'd call the Thick and Slight guys in the first 21 picks the truly elite prospects. The light and heavy 1st/2nd guys are good bets, but as a group not as good as the ones with the desirable BMIs.

And you should never take a WR that's both average weight and average BMI.

And thinking about this from an NFL team perspective...

If you were willing to spend a very high draft pick on a WR you'd only ever want to do it for an elite prospect (high/low BMI). The light or heavy + 1st/2nd guys might be worth a first rounder, but not a top ten pick. After that, I'd just wait. So much of a WRs prospects are down to QB, offense, work ethic, and intangibles that it really is a crapshoot after the first couple are gone. And there's only one or two really great prospects most years.
Except guys like Reggie Wayne??? 198lbs, 26.9 BMI. Oh wait he was drafted 30th, not top 21...I am considering buying the Football Prospectus to read your latest version, but from what I see so far really not worth the money. (not saying the other many valuable pages are not worth it)

Sorry if that sounds like a shot at you, but I'm curious to know how much you have improved things.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top