Utilizing Targets Info to predict upside/downside (1 Viewer)

[The Rook]

Without giving up paid content or turning this into an assistant coach forum question, I'm bringing up the topic of Randy Moss and his targets information. The item that jumped out at me is the fact he has less targets than Wes Welker. However Moss has caught 94% of his targets. That makes me wonder if it can only be downhill from here? But taking it a step further, any thoughts on how to best utilize this target information?

For example, in the past, I've looked for sleeper receivers by seeing who has high number of targets, but not big numbers. My thought is they are bound to start having some numbers if they maintain the targets.

I'm curious if there is an average we should expect completion percentage compared to targets. If a receiver is significantly above that percentage, perhaps we could conclude they are a sell high candidate?

Any thoughts? Other suggestions on how to utilize targets to identify trends?

 

[Burning Sensation]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year.

Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.

Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

 

[Chaka]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year. Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

Are you watching the Patriots games? He is all over the field.The 94% thing will definitely drop (isn't Brady over 80% completions this season) but Brady will find Moss no matter what. I wouldn't expect 30+ TDs from Moss but he could certainly approach 20 with Brady steering the offense.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year.

Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.

Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

Are you watching the Patriots games? He is all over the field.The 94% thing will definitely drop (isn't Brady over 80% completions this season) but Brady will find Moss no matter what. I wouldn't expect 30+ TDs from Moss but he could certainly approach 20 with Brady steering the offense.

Not sure i have ever seen Moss go over the middle underneath a safety.

 

[Chaka]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year.

Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.

Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

Are you watching the Patriots games? He is all over the field.The 94% thing will definitely drop (isn't Brady over 80% completions this season) but Brady will find Moss no matter what. I wouldn't expect 30+ TDs from Moss but he could certainly approach 20 with Brady steering the offense.

Not sure i have ever seen Moss go over the middle underneath a safety.

His first catch of the season was a crossing pattern underneath the safeties.

 

[Burning Sensation]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year.

Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.

Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

Are you watching the Patriots games? He is all over the field.The 94% thing will definitely drop (isn't Brady over 80% completions this season) but Brady will find Moss no matter what. I wouldn't expect 30+ TDs from Moss but he could certainly approach 20 with Brady steering the offense.

Not sure i have ever seen Moss go over the middle underneath a safety.

His first catch of the season was a crossing pattern underneath the safeties.

Disclaimer: I have not watched either Pats game this year.

 

[Chaka]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year.

Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.

Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

Are you watching the Patriots games? He is all over the field.The 94% thing will definitely drop (isn't Brady over 80% completions this season) but Brady will find Moss no matter what. I wouldn't expect 30+ TDs from Moss but he could certainly approach 20 with Brady steering the offense.

Not sure i have ever seen Moss go over the middle underneath a safety.

His first catch of the season was a crossing pattern underneath the safeties.

Disclaimer: I have not watched either Pats game this year.

So the answer to my first question is "No." Moss appears to be going all over the field this season. It is a scary thought for defensive coordinators around the league.What happened to the Bubba Smith avatar?

 

[Burning Sensation]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year.

Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.

Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

Are you watching the Patriots games? He is all over the field.The 94% thing will definitely drop (isn't Brady over 80% completions this season) but Brady will find Moss no matter what. I wouldn't expect 30+ TDs from Moss but he could certainly approach 20 with Brady steering the offense.

Not sure i have ever seen Moss go over the middle underneath a safety.

His first catch of the season was a crossing pattern underneath the safeties.

Disclaimer: I have not watched either Pats game this year.

So the answer to my first question is "No." Moss appears to be going all over the field this season. It is a scary thought for defensive coordinators around the league.What happened to the Bubba Smith avatar?

Correct, the answer to your first question is no. I was basing it more on every other game before this year. Lost the good looking guy avatar years ago, where have you been.

 

[bostonfred]

Moss has made every catch so far except the Patriots screen.

That said, I said before the season that I expected him to blow up early, as the Pats took advantage of their new toy and opponents didn't adjust to how good he is. I expect that going forward, teams will gameplan to stop Moss more often, and he'll come back to earth, while Stallworth and Maroney get a brief uptick. It's going to be really difficult for teams to shut down Moss and Welker, though, so I don't know how much it'll matter.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Without giving up paid content or turning this into an assistant coach forum question, I'm bringing up the topic of Randy Moss and his targets information. The item that jumped out at me is the fact he has less targets than Wes Welker. However Moss has caught 94% of his targets. That makes me wonder if it can only be downhill from here? But taking it a step further, any thoughts on how to best utilize this target information?

For example, in the past, I've looked for sleeper receivers by seeing who has high number of targets, but not big numbers. My thought is they are bound to start having some numbers if they maintain the targets.

I'm curious if there is an average we should expect completion percentage compared to targets. If a receiver is significantly above that percentage, perhaps we could conclude they are a sell high candidate?

Any thoughts? Other suggestions on how to utilize targets to identify trends?

I think target info is probably more harmful than helpful, since I don't think it's very useful and I do think people use it.Is it better to have lots of targets and a low reception percentage than a small number of targets and a high reception percentage? If the answer to this isn't clear, then target data is pretty useless (since in all other instances target data will be even less telling).

I think target data is largely useless when seeing which WR is a good NFL receiver, and I don't think it's a whole lot more relevant for fantasy purposes.

Here's a good post on this. Maybe I'll write something up in the coming weeks more fantasy related, but for now, this seems pretty convincing:

I took all pairs of consecutive wide receiver seasons since 2002/2003 in which the player played at least eight games in each season and had at least 30 receptions in the first season (there were 264 such). Then I ran a regression of Year N+1 receptions per game against Year N receptions per game and Year N targets per game. Here is the resulting equation:

Year N+1 rec =~ .64 + .63*(Year N rec) + .07*(Year N targets)

The coefficient on Year N targets is positive, but it’s small, and not significantly different from zero in the “official” statistical sense. In other words, given the variation in the data, there is no real reason to assume the true coefficient on Year N targets isn’t zero.

And again, it doesn’t much matter whether it’s statistically significant or not. It’s too small to be very meaningful anyway. Last year, Chris Chambers had 3.7 catches per game on 9.7 targets per game. That’s a ton of targets for someone with so few catches. Our formula predicts him to have about 3.6 catches per game next season. If he had had the same number of receptions, but a more typical amount of targets, say 6 per game, last season, then the formula would project him with 3.4 catches per game next year. That’s a difference of only 3 catches over a 16-game season.

For what it’s worth, I also included various age controls in the regression and it doesn’t alter the conclusions.

You argue that a player with a small number of targets and a high reception/target ratio is a potential sell-high candidate. Presumably it's a sell for a player with a larger number of targets, and presumably one with a lower reception/target ratio (if they have the same ratio on more targets, they have better numbers, and couldn't be acquired). I think I'd need to see some sort of evidence that this is a good idea.

 

[BoulderBob]

Moss has made every catch so far except the Patriots screen. That said, I said before the season that I expected him to blow up early, as the Pats took advantage of their new toy and opponents didn't adjust to how good he is. I expect that going forward, teams will gameplan to stop Moss more often, and he'll come back to earth, while Stallworth and Maroney get a brief uptick. It's going to be really difficult for teams to shut down Moss and Welker, though, so I don't know how much it'll matter.

 

[Chaka]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year.

Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.

Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

Are you watching the Patriots games? He is all over the field.The 94% thing will definitely drop (isn't Brady over 80% completions this season) but Brady will find Moss no matter what. I wouldn't expect 30+ TDs from Moss but he could certainly approach 20 with Brady steering the offense.

Not sure i have ever seen Moss go over the middle underneath a safety.

His first catch of the season was a crossing pattern underneath the safeties.

Disclaimer: I have not watched either Pats game this year.

So the answer to my first question is "No." Moss appears to be going all over the field this season. It is a scary thought for defensive coordinators around the league.What happened to the Bubba Smith avatar?

Correct, the answer to your first question is no. I was basing it more on every other game before this year. Lost the good looking guy avatar years ago, where have you been.

I only frequent the SP during the regular season.

 

[3nOut]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year.

Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.

Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes unless he is near the end zone.

Fixed. I wouldn't care if he totals 10 yards if he gets 2 TDs to go along with them.

 

[BeachBums]

Without giving up paid content or turning this into an assistant coach forum question, I'm bringing up the topic of Randy Moss and his targets information. The item that jumped out at me is the fact he has less targets than Wes Welker. However Moss has caught 94% of his targets. That makes me wonder if it can only be downhill from here? But taking it a step further, any thoughts on how to best utilize this target information?

For example, in the past, I've looked for sleeper receivers by seeing who has high number of targets, but not big numbers. My thought is they are bound to start having some numbers if they maintain the targets.

I'm curious if there is an average we should expect completion percentage compared to targets. If a receiver is significantly above that percentage, perhaps we could conclude they are a sell high candidate?

Any thoughts? Other suggestions on how to utilize targets to identify trends?

I think target info is probably more harmful than helpful, since I don't think it's very useful and I do think people use it.Is it better to have lots of targets and a low reception percentage than a small number of targets and a high reception percentage? If the answer to this isn't clear, then target data is pretty useless (since in all other instances target data will be even less telling).

I think target data is largely useless when seeing which WR is a good NFL receiver, and I don't think it's a whole lot more relevant for fantasy purposes.

Here's a good post on this. Maybe I'll write something up in the coming weeks more fantasy related, but for now, this seems pretty convincing:

I took all pairs of consecutive wide receiver seasons since 2002/2003 in which the player played at least eight games in each season and had at least 30 receptions in the first season (there were 264 such). Then I ran a regression of Year N+1 receptions per game against Year N receptions per game and Year N targets per game. Here is the resulting equation:

Year N+1 rec =~ .64 + .63*(Year N rec) + .07*(Year N targets)

The coefficient on Year N targets is positive, but it’s small, and not significantly different from zero in the “official” statistical sense. In other words, given the variation in the data, there is no real reason to assume the true coefficient on Year N targets isn’t zero.

And again, it doesn’t much matter whether it’s statistically significant or not. It’s too small to be very meaningful anyway. Last year, Chris Chambers had 3.7 catches per game on 9.7 targets per game. That’s a ton of targets for someone with so few catches. Our formula predicts him to have about 3.6 catches per game next season. If he had had the same number of receptions, but a more typical amount of targets, say 6 per game, last season, then the formula would project him with 3.4 catches per game next year. That’s a difference of only 3 catches over a 16-game season.

For what it’s worth, I also included various age controls in the regression and it doesn’t alter the conclusions.

You argue that a player with a small number of targets and a high reception/target ratio is a potential sell-high candidate. Presumably it's a sell for a player with a larger number of targets, and presumably one with a lower reception/target ratio (if they have the same ratio on more targets, they have better numbers, and couldn't be acquired). I think I'd need to see some sort of evidence that this is a good idea.

Good stuff Chase. Thanks!

 

[kensat30]

Target info is most useful for players who have breakout potential and for waiver wire pickups IMO.

I agree that Randy Moss' target to catch % has to go down. But I think even if it does, Moss has enough big play ability to continue to put up points. I'm still not 100% sold on Moss at this point though. I would trade him straight up for TO in a heartbeat.

 

[The Rook]

Without giving up paid content or turning this into an assistant coach forum question, I'm bringing up the topic of Randy Moss and his targets information. The item that jumped out at me is the fact he has less targets than Wes Welker. However Moss has caught 94% of his targets. That makes me wonder if it can only be downhill from here? But taking it a step further, any thoughts on how to best utilize this target information?

For example, in the past, I've looked for sleeper receivers by seeing who has high number of targets, but not big numbers. My thought is they are bound to start having some numbers if they maintain the targets.

I'm curious if there is an average we should expect completion percentage compared to targets. If a receiver is significantly above that percentage, perhaps we could conclude they are a sell high candidate?

Any thoughts? Other suggestions on how to utilize targets to identify trends?

I think target info is probably more harmful than helpful, since I don't think it's very useful and I do think people use it.Is it better to have lots of targets and a low reception percentage than a small number of targets and a high reception percentage? If the answer to this isn't clear, then target data is pretty useless (since in all other instances target data will be even less telling).

I think target data is largely useless when seeing which WR is a good NFL receiver, and I don't think it's a whole lot more relevant for fantasy purposes.

Here's a good post on this. Maybe I'll write something up in the coming weeks more fantasy related, but for now, this seems pretty convincing:

I took all pairs of consecutive wide receiver seasons since 2002/2003 in which the player played at least eight games in each season and had at least 30 receptions in the first season (there were 264 such). Then I ran a regression of Year N+1 receptions per game against Year N receptions per game and Year N targets per game. Here is the resulting equation:

Year N+1 rec =~ .64 + .63*(Year N rec) + .07*(Year N targets)

The coefficient on Year N targets is positive, but it’s small, and not significantly different from zero in the “official” statistical sense. In other words, given the variation in the data, there is no real reason to assume the true coefficient on Year N targets isn’t zero.

And again, it doesn’t much matter whether it’s statistically significant or not. It’s too small to be very meaningful anyway. Last year, Chris Chambers had 3.7 catches per game on 9.7 targets per game. That’s a ton of targets for someone with so few catches. Our formula predicts him to have about 3.6 catches per game next season. If he had had the same number of receptions, but a more typical amount of targets, say 6 per game, last season, then the formula would project him with 3.4 catches per game next year. That’s a difference of only 3 catches over a 16-game season.

For what it’s worth, I also included various age controls in the regression and it doesn’t alter the conclusions.

You argue that a player with a small number of targets and a high reception/target ratio is a potential sell-high candidate. Presumably it's a sell for a player with a larger number of targets, and presumably one with a lower reception/target ratio (if they have the same ratio on more targets, they have better numbers, and couldn't be acquired). I think I'd need to see some sort of evidence that this is a good idea.

wow !! thanks Chase. This is good info. Definitely keeping me from putting too much value on targets.

 

[pollardsvision]

in moss' case, it seems clear that welker will lead the team in receptions and moss will primarily be the big-play threat. to me, it seems that welker's effectiveness should help keep the deep routes open for moss. (if they try to eliminate moss, brady will carve them up underneath with welker).

i don't see this formula changing unless moss gets hurt.

if there is an exception to the 'target rule', moss would appear to be it. when healthy, he's the best deep threat in nfl history, he has a hall of fame QB to get him the ball, and plays for a team that's more than competent enough to keep getting him good looks.

 

[Brides Maids]

Andre Johnsons targets over the last few years combined with his talent made him my 4th ranked WR going into the year. I figured with a QB who was not Carr, he was in for a big year. Yes, targets are a huge factor to me when i rank/value WR's.Moss is a freak, but most of his points will have to come from big plays, he is not much for short/intermediate routes.

I think though with the Moss example you also have to take into consideration the quality of the QB throwing the ball. In this Moss has what I think is the most accurate QB in the league, I don't expect the accuracy to slip here so I don't expect the production to fall either.Their lack of running success (at least RBs breaking the big gainers) has an effect here as well, as long as the running game doesn't take some of the production away again I don't see Mosses production falling. What is surprising to me this year after the rather pedestrian last 2 years for NE's passing game is how they have come out the first 2 games and looked to pass first and run second. I guess looking back at the off season acquisitions made by NE the game plan should not have surprised anyone, it may have been the pre-season issues that threw me off thereI also think it is inaccurate to look at most of Moss's production as being "big play" and not much for short/intermediate routes. They may turn into "big plays" but I think you are seeing a result of Moss's amazing YAC ability the pass he caught over the middle was about a 15 to 20 yard pass that he turned into a 50 to 60 yard TD. It's not like moss is sprinting down the field and hoping Brady will rain a ball down to him like maybe some of the many connections between JP Losman and Evans. I do think you can see early this year with that duo the kind of drop off you may be worried about in Moss's case. This is not the NE style of offense, if you do see a long connection Moss usually has 5 yards on the receiver and the pass is a Strike not a rainbow.All in all I do NOT foresee a drop in Moss's production and I am very upset I didn't spend the 15 to $20 it would have taken to get him in our auction this year.

 

[PatsFan72]

Targets are just one piece of the puzzle. You have to put together many other pieces before you see the whole picture.

With Moss, the way that the Patriots do things comes into play. They will go with what is working, and looking at their schedule, Brady to Moss will be working for at least another 4 maybe 5 weeks (BUF, CIN, CLE, DAL, MIA).

Right now I'm targeting to trade him after week 6 or 7. Mostly because his value should still be going up, and his injury risk is high considering age, recent history, and how they are using him, but it's going to be really really difficult to remind myself that I should be getting rid of him.

 

[Dolfan34]

Moss has made every catch so far except the Patriots screen.

That said, I said before the season that I expected him to blow up early, as the Pats took advantage of their new toy and opponents didn't adjust to how good he is. I expect that going forward, teams will gameplan to stop Moss more often, and he'll come back to earth, while Stallworth and Maroney get a brief uptick. It's going to be really difficult for teams to shut down Moss and Welker, though, so I don't know how much it'll matter.

did you see those 3 defenders around him on that one touchdown he had last sunday? we all have seen him beat double and triple teams before. it is downright scary what he and brady are capable of doing this season and beyond. if moss remains in NE with brady as his qb for the remainder of his career and he plays into his late 30's, it is a good possibility that moss will break all of rice's records.

 

[Chase Stuart]

Moss has made every catch so far except the Patriots screen.

That said, I said before the season that I expected him to blow up early, as the Pats took advantage of their new toy and opponents didn't adjust to how good he is. I expect that going forward, teams will gameplan to stop Moss more often, and he'll come back to earth, while Stallworth and Maroney get a brief uptick. It's going to be really difficult for teams to shut down Moss and Welker, though, so I don't know how much it'll matter.

did you see those 3 defenders around him on that one touchdown he had last sunday? we all have seen him beat double and triple teams before. it is downright scary what he and brady are capable of doing this season and beyond. if moss remains in NE with brady as his qb for the remainder of his career and he plays into his late 30's, it is a good possibility that moss will break all of rice's records.

Moss is 856 receptions away from catching Jerry Rice. They're going to extend the NFL season to 20 games before Moss can touch that record.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

I took a look at this and have a different take than Chase's. Not saying it's right, just that it's a different point of view.

Catch % is almost entirely driven by the QB's completion % to his WRs. And there aren't very many WRs that consistently beat or underperform their QB year to year. Not saying there aren't any, just that for the most part the WRs catch the catchable balls the QBs throw them. And IIRC that's especially true if you control for the differences in role for WR1/WR2/WR3.

If you accept that, then receptions correlate almost 1:1 with targets, and it's targets that drive your WR's fantasy value.

 

[Chase Stuart]

I took a look at this and have a different take than Chase's. Not saying it's right, just that it's a different point of view.Catch % is almost entirely driven by the QB's completion % to his WRs. And there aren't very many WRs that consistently beat or underperform their QB year to year. Not saying there aren't any, just that for the most part the WRs catch the catchable balls the QBs throw them. And IIRC that's especially true if you control for the differences in role for WR1/WR2/WR3.If you accept that, then receptions correlate almost 1:1 with targets, and it's targets that drive your WR's fantasy value.

I don't really understand what you're saying here.Receptions don't correlate almost 1:1 with targets. But if they did, I'm not sure how that would be useful, either. I guess I need a more thorough explanation.

 

[AussieOyOyOy]

There is much more to predicting future football statistics than applying mathematical concepts to past performance. Analyzing the numbers is certainly a tool that should be used, but not followed blindly.

Don't outsmart yourself. If you just are looking for comfort if you passed on Moss, then, by all means, look for the cloud in the silver lining. But, if you have Moss, just sit back and enjoy the ride. If you have the opportunity to acquire him, then do it. Brady and Moss love each other. You can see it in their body language. They're both incredible talents, as well. You throw in the POed "let's just run it up on these motherfathers" aspect from Belichick, and I think Moss owners have pure gold. He's the #1 WR in FF to me. I'd trade away Steve Smith for him, straight up.

 

[Dolfan34]

Moss has made every catch so far except the Patriots screen.

That said, I said before the season that I expected him to blow up early, as the Pats took advantage of their new toy and opponents didn't adjust to how good he is. I expect that going forward, teams will gameplan to stop Moss more often, and he'll come back to earth, while Stallworth and Maroney get a brief uptick. It's going to be really difficult for teams to shut down Moss and Welker, though, so I don't know how much it'll matter.

did you see those 3 defenders around him on that one touchdown he had last sunday? we all have seen him beat double and triple teams before. it is downright scary what he and brady are capable of doing this season and beyond. if moss remains in NE with brady as his qb for the remainder of his career and he plays into his late 30's, it is a good possibility that moss will break all of rice's records.

Moss is 856 receptions away from catching Jerry Rice. They're going to extend the NFL season to 20 games before Moss can touch that record.

if moss plays until he is 38 ( very possible ) he would need to average about 97 receptions per year ( unlikely, but certainly possible ) to break rice's receptions record. i dont really understand the 20 games per season comment... but ok fine. yards and tds though? thats a very good possibility. anyway, you got my point. this guy is dangerous and who gives two ####s about targets when we are talking about brady to moss. that just sounds scary. these two are that good. peyton who and marvin who?

 

[The Rook]

I took a look at this and have a different take than Chase's. Not saying it's right, just that it's a different point of view.Catch % is almost entirely driven by the QB's completion % to his WRs. And there aren't very many WRs that consistently beat or underperform their QB year to year. Not saying there aren't any, just that for the most part the WRs catch the catchable balls the QBs throw them. And IIRC that's especially true if you control for the differences in role for WR1/WR2/WR3.If you accept that, then receptions correlate almost 1:1 with targets, and it's targets that drive your WR's fantasy value.

I don't really understand what you're saying here.Receptions don't correlate almost 1:1 with targets. But if they did, I'm not sure how that would be useful, either. I guess I need a more thorough explanation.

I'm not sure I'm completely following either, but here's how I understand wdcrob's post (using hypothetical numbers). If Brady has a historical completion percentage of 70%, wdcrob is saying that is the significant statistic. I think wdcrob's 1:1 reference means that he feels of 100 targets that Brady is going to complete 70 of them regardless of receiver, so how often each receiver is targeted does matter (while trying to control for WR1/WR2/WR3). I think I'm following the logic, and I'm guessing Brady's completion percentage isn't 90% (which is about what Moss reception percentage right now) so is Moss in for a decline and Welker for an increase?

 

[Chase Stuart]

Maybe I'll write something up in the coming weeks more fantasy related,

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/2007/07stuart_goose4.php

 

[The Jerk]

All in all I do NOT foresee a drop in Moss's production and I am very upset I didn't spend the 15 to $20 it would have taken to get him in our auction this year.

Well, based on target info or anything else, I think it is thinking very irrationally to expect Moss to maintain his current production.He is on pace to have 117 receptions for 2150 yards and 27 TDs.

I'll take the under on all three, but especially on the yards and TDs. Of the three, the yards appear to be by far the least likely to be reached.

Harrison had 143 receptions in 2002.

Rice had 1848 yards in 1995, and 22 receiving TDs in 1987.

Link to NFL Receiving Records

Of course, Rice's 22 TDs (with one additional rushing TD) came in only 12 games in the strike-shortened 1987. Best of all, he only had 65 receptions!

 

[Modog814]

I took a look at this and have a different take than Chase's. Not saying it's right, just that it's a different point of view.

Catch % is almost entirely driven by the QB's completion % to his WRs. And there aren't very many WRs that consistently beat or underperform their QB year to year. Not saying there aren't any, just that for the most part the WRs catch the catchable balls the QBs throw them. And IIRC that's especially true if you control for the differences in role for WR1/WR2/WR3.

If you accept that, then receptions correlate almost 1:1 with targets, and it's targets that drive your WR's fantasy value.

I don't really understand what you're saying here.Receptions don't correlate almost 1:1 with targets. But if they did, I'm not sure how that would be useful, either. I guess I need a more thorough explanation. :X

I think what wdcrob is trying to say is that if a QB (say Tom Brady) completes 60% of his passes in a season, then you could expect each WR on a team to have roughly a similar catch rate (+ or - a few percentage points). This of course is an assumption and while it seems logical I would think you would need to show statistically that this is in fact the case*)

Thus if each WR is expected to catch ~60% of targets, then Receptions have a 1 to 1 correlation with targets as seen by this chart:

5 targets x . 6 = 3 rec

6 targets x . 6 = 3.6 rec

7 targets x . 6 = 4.2 rec

.

.

.

10 targets x . 6 = 6 rec

.

.

and so on. Conclusion: The More Targets = The more receptions

* The problem with this thinking is that your assumption could be way off (I don't know if it is or not but compare these two scenarios:

Scenario 1

QB A completes 60%

WR B has 100 targets and catches 60 of them

WR C has 80 targets and catches 48 of them

WR D has 60 targets and catchs 36 of them

Assuming QB A only throws to WR B, C and D, his Com/Att % would be 144/240 60%

Scenario 2

QB A completes 60%

WR B has 100 targets and catches 75 of them

WR C has 80 targets and catches 44 of them

WR D has 60 targets and catchs 25 of them

Assuming QB A only throws to WR B, C and D, his Com/Att % would be 144/240 60%

Same #'s but different Catch rate by the WR. If I were to guess which is a more accurate model I'd say Scenario B since you'd think that each team generally has WR1>WR2>WR3 (obviously some cases can be made where WR1=WR2 or WR2=WR3, but that's not the point)