Welcome to the Post Season!
The Bowl season has
begun and we are 4 months from the NFL Draft in Philadelphia, the City of
Brotherly Love. But love ain’t got
nothing to do with the business of football where it’s all about winning. Over the course of the season, this space has
attempted to bring cold statistical analysis based on the numbers every
week. The goal? To introduce the reader to
some players who may not be household names.
The yardstick used is Return on Investment – that is, how much
additional production does a receiver provide given his work load allotment. This measurement is based on rates and not raw
numbers which don’t always give proper context.
ROI in Constant Motion
During the time between Bowl Season and the April 27th
draft, the final ROI rankings will be adjusted based on inclusion of WR
targets, which will help generate the final listings. Currently, I’ve added up player targets the
old fashioned way (going through play by play sheets) and will continue to do
so all winter.
I hope to use other sources to further screen out RB
reception statistics from the final analysis.
RB stats, based on the way they are used in the passing game, can skew
WR ROI for better or worse.
Throughout the year, I included ROI for FBS, FCS, Division
II and Division III football. Because
of the extensive work involved in tabulating targets, only a select few non-FBS
receivers will be included in the final tables.
I’m hoping to include anywhere from 10-30 receivers from the other three
divisions to be selected at my discretion.
What is ROI?
Final ROI is composed of three scores: Reception ROI , Yard ROI
and Touchdown ROI (for more detail on how these numbers are calculated, please
see Return on Investment). Each score is ranked (#1 being the best) and
the rankings averaged so that player with the lowest average ranking has the best
Return on Investment.
ROI is designed to be a way to objectively look at
statistics and in no way a predictor of future NFL success since so many
factors that cannot be conventionally measured (called intangibles by many) go
into making a superior receiver (or seamstress or stockbroker or chef). ROI should introduce the reader to some new
names for deeper research.
Regular Season 2016 ROI - Raw Stats (inclusive of RB figures)
Based on the stats to date, here are the top ROI WRs who
meet the minimum eligibility requirements that may be entering this year’s NFL
draft. Players not listed either did not have enough receptions to qualify, had negative efficiency or have not declared for the NFL draft.
|
School
|
Player
|
Targets
|
Recs
|
Yards
|
TDs
|
Avg Rank
|
ELITE?
|
|
|
1
|
Syracuse
|
126
|
94
|
1482
|
14
|
3.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
2
|
Texas A&M
|
77
|
49
|
885
|
10
|
4.33
|
Yes
|
||
|
3
|
Northwestern
|
121
|
84
|
1196
|
12
|
6.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
4
|
Augustana (SD) Division II
|
125
|
77
|
1490
|
21
|
10.00
|
No
|
||
|
5
|
East Carolina
|
85
|
45
|
818
|
8
|
10.67
|
No
|
||
|
5
|
North Carolina
|
29
|
16
|
309
|
4
|
11.00
|
No
|
||
|
5
|
Oklahoma State
|
107
|
62
|
1209
|
9
|
12.33
|
No
|
||
|
8
|
Purdue
|
97
|
49
|
951
|
10
|
12.33
|
No
|
||
|
9
|
Utah
|
79
|
43
|
684
|
5
|
13.00
|
Yes
|
||
|
10
|
North Carolina
|
72
|
48
|
768
|
7
|
13.33
|
No
|
||
|
11
|
Western Michigan
|
123
|
91
|
1427
|
18
|
13.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
12
|
Hawaii
|
109
|
70
|
1036
|
7
|
13.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
13
|
Ohio
|
88
|
53
|
872
|
4
|
13.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
14
|
Miss St
|
114
|
68
|
873
|
12
|
14.33
|
Yes
|
||
|
14
|
Eastern Washington
|
132
|
107
|
1520
|
15
|
15.33
|
Yes
|
||
|
16
|
Michigan
|
89
|
52
|
826
|
7
|
15.67
|
No
|
||
|
17
|
Clemson
|
114
|
84
|
1171
|
10
|
16.00
|
Yes
|
||
|
18
|
Oklahoma
|
110
|
74
|
1465
|
16
|
16.00
|
No
|
||
|
19
|
Houston
|
Chance Allen
|
94
|
56
|
815
|
6
|
16.33
|
No
|
|
|
20
|
Wyoming
|
114
|
65
|
1213
|
12
|
16.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
20
|
Akron
|
100
|
62
|
1018
|
6
|
17.00
|
Yes
|
||
|
22
|
Saint Cloud (MN)
|
120
|
71
|
1142
|
7
|
17.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
23
|
USC
|
91
|
63
|
781
|
9
|
18.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
24
|
Northern Illinois
|
146
|
87
|
1156
|
8
|
18.67
|
Yes
|
||
|
25
|
Michigan
|
64
|
43
|
518
|
4
|
20.33
|
No
|
||
|
26
|
Georgia State
|
122
|
67
|
968
|
5
|
20.67
|
No
|
||
|
28
|
Michigan
|
58
|
31
|
469
|
2
|
23.67
|
No
|
||
|
28
|
North Carolina
|
126
|
91
|
1027
|
5
|
23.67
|
No
|
James Washington evidently confirmed he will return to Okie State but I left him on the list just to give an idea of where he fit in. Jake Butt is on the list to provide context to the Michigan WRs. And, also because of his last name. Mack Hollins did not make the minimum reception cut, but I included him because he was on pace to qualify prior to injury.
Updated numbers will be posted after the National Champion has been crowded. Until then, I will update this space with opinions about the members of the list is scouting report form.
Shameless Self-Promotion!
If you found this post interesting, please like or share the original link.
If you found this post interesting, please like or share the original link.
See you next week!
No comments:
Post a Comment