Worried about? Sammy edition...

[Dynasty DeLorean]

It just hit me. Is Watkins the next Michael Floyd? Think about this, neither have had more than 66 receptions in a single season. Their athleticism and career numbers are eerily similar.

The biggest difference is that Arizona did everything they could to make Floyd the successor to Fitzgerald and he refused to take the wheel.

1. He joined the team in the middle of preseason and while he may know the playbook, the chemistry may not be there with Goff.

Buffalo did exactly that though and essentially gave up on him.

I can see if Watkins is under-performing next year on a different team ppl would say "you just need to give him time to acclimate to the new offense" again.

I get it, he's not THIS bad. But is he ever going to put it all together. Idk. Someone else mentioned that he's simply not getting targets, and while that is true that's the deal with every WR. Nearly any WR will be good with enough targets. You have to earn your targets. Some players are very good with the targets they get but that doesn't necessarily mean they've earned 150 targets a year. The NFL is a strange place sometimes.

[dipANDglide]

Fantasy is all about opportunity, without it you don't produce. I have no idea how a talent like him can only be getting 4-5 targets a game. It's maddening. The only problem with Sammy has been spotty health. If he stays healthy, and gets opportunity, he'll eat.

[Cameron Giles]

Buffalo did exactly that though and essentially gave up on him.

I can see if Watkins is under-performing next year on a different team ppl would say "you just need to give him time to acclimate to the new offense" again.

Watkins produced in Buffalo though, he just wasn't healthy for 2016. They knew they weren't going to re-sign him, and I'd guess it's because of the injury concern.

I get it, he's not THIS bad. But is he ever going to put it all together. Idk. Someone else mentioned that he's simply not getting targets, and while that is true that's the deal with every WR. Nearly any WR will be good with enough targets. You have to earn your targets. Some players are very good with the targets they get but that doesn't necessarily mean they've earned 150 targets a year. The NFL is a strange place sometimes.

I don't think Watkins will ever be the Top-5 WR people assumed he would be. However, he's currently on pace for 64 targets this season. That's 4 targets a game. Can we really say that Watkins is only worth 64 targets? And how do we expect him to produce with that number?

For comparison:

Target Pace:

Robert Woods: 99
Cooper Kupp: 85
Todd Gurley: 80
Tyler Higbee: 64
Sammy Watkins: 64

So, we're saying that Watkins is only worth the same amount of looks as Tyler Higbee? So far, the targets would seem to indicate that Watkins is largely a decoy for Woods and Kupp, who draw more favorable matchups and run routes closer to the LOS. The numbers back it up:

Average Targeted Air Yards:

Sammy Watkins: 15.2
Tyler Higbee: 12.4
Robert Woods: 11.8
Cooper Kupp: 9.8

[Dynasty DeLorean]

So far, the targets would seem to indicate that Watkins is largely a decoy for Woods and Kupp, who draw more favorable matchups and run routes closer to the LOS.

Yeah I agree Watkins is being used probably similarly to Brandin Cooks in NE, just that he has Goff throwing to him and not Brady. I am close to personally done with the "if this underperforming WR only got more targets (or touches for a RB) he'd be so gud!" way of thinking because it almost never seems to pan out. I'm not against Watkins in particular, it's just that after 4 years you probably are what you are. Of course there have been guys like Jordy Nelson who come on late but there are likely multitudes more that don't.

[Generic Username]

Why trade for him, though? Was a designated decoy the goal with him? I see and understand the arguments of "he's new to the system", "he and Goff just need more time", as well as "Goff stares down his first read too often", but if Sammy really is a WR1 talent shouldn't he be the first read often? From a fantasy perspective, I just don't see Sammy as being worth much more than a random 1st and 2nd combo right now. Owners' can obviously demand more, but buyers shouldn't be willing to go much higher.

They gave up a 2nd round pick and a CB for Sammy as a potential 1 year rental decoy? Seems odd, if not foolish, with his current usage. Shoot, even if chemistry really is an issue, wouldn't forcing the issue be better than not targeting him at all?

(I don't own him anywhere, for the record)

[Cameron Giles]

So far, the targets would seem to indicate that Watkins is largely a decoy for Woods and Kupp, who draw more favorable matchups and run routes closer to the LOS.

Yeah I agree Watkins is being used probably similarly to Brandin Cooks in NE, just that he has Goff throwing to him and not Brady. I am close to personally done with the "if this underperforming WR only got more targets (or touches for a RB) he'd be so gud!" way of thinking because it almost never seems to pan out. I'm not against Watkins in particular, it's just that after 4 years you probably are what you are. Of course there have been guys like Jordy Nelson who come on late but there are likely multitudes more that don't.

I get what you're saying, but it's really a matter of the parallel between target volume and talent level. You wouldn't buy a mediocre or average WR, who's being propped up by a ridiculous target share. It's not going to last once a team figures out they can do better. However, Watkins talent level is actually parallel to a huge share. We've seen him produce at a high level, so it's not a question of whether his skills have translated or not.

2015: 60 receptions, 1,047 yards in 13 games on 96 targets (7.3/g)
2017 (Pace): 64 receptions, 592 yards in 16 games on 64 targets (4.0/g)

I don't think it's unrealistic that Watkins can be the 2015 player. I do think Watkins is what he is, but this season isn't what he is.

[Generic Username]

We still blaming this on "situation"?

What's "buy low" mean now?

[lukkynumber13]

Buy low would be paying a First from a good to great team for him

[Generic Username]

Essentially a contender, then? Hard buy and sell for a rebuilding team: not gonna sell him for much compared to previous rates and would probably rather sell aging stars for something better

Maybe the Bears should trade for him and he'll get a bigger share percentage of targets finally...2 out of 7 is more than 5 out of 36

[gogobradyarm]

He was getting open and Goff was just missing him badly. The guy can ball like the best of them, he just gets limited quality targets.

[Slackalacker]

Still have no regrets selling him before the start of the season.

[StableOfRBs]

Granted I've gone on record in two separate leagues now of not being a Watkins guy so if it seems like there's bias in this post that wasn't my intention, I try to be as objective as possible when evaluating players.

My biggest issue with Watkins has been that people look at his season totals and his "on pace" numbers and don't pay attention to his week-by-week numbers. This is a receiver who people routinely pay WR1 prices for (and more in some cases) and either drafted or acquired him in order to start him week-in and week-out in a typical 12-team .5PPR 2RB/2WR/Flex league.

These are his career numbers for every week in a .5PPR league, setting a benchmark at 10 points as "startable" and anything at or above 10 points will be bolded (games where he didn't play or accrue targets are omitted):

-2014
4.6, 21.7, 2.9, 11, 12.2, 3.7, 28.7, 23.2, 4.7, 5.2, 5, 2.6, 14.2, 3.3, 15, 7.9

-2015
0, 15, 4.4, 12.8, 26.8, 2.9, 5.4, 30.8, 18.4, 16.9, 25.6, 10.9, 19.1

-2016
6.3, 3, 9.5, 5.3, 13.4, 1.5, 24.9, 5.1

-2017 (through week 7)
8.3, 4, 25.6, 2.2, 0, 1.6, 5.7

That's 19 "startable" weeks out of a possible 44 games played, just over 43% of the time. If you don't like my arbitrary score of 10 you could lower it to 8 and that would still only be 21 out of 44 weeks, 47.7% of the time. Talented or not, athletic or not, targeted or not, Watkins is putting up subpar performances >50% of the time for your fantasy team. As a guy who is still (or was until the past couple weeks) widely viewed as "if he plays, you start him" he is losing you more weeks than he's winning.

[lukkynumber13]

Granted I've gone on record in two separate leagues now of not being a Watkins guy so if it seems like there's bias in this post that wasn't my intention, I try to be as objective as possible when evaluating players.

My biggest issue with Watkins has been that people look at his season totals and his "on pace" numbers and don't pay attention to his week-by-week numbers. This is a receiver who people routinely pay WR1 prices for (and more in some cases) and either drafted or acquired him in order to start him week-in and week-out in a typical 12-team .5PPR 2RB/2WR/Flex league.

These are his career numbers for every week in a .5PPR league, setting a benchmark at 10 points as "startable" and anything at or above 10 points will be bolded (games where he didn't play or accrue targets are omitted):

-2014
4.6, 21.7, 2.9, 11, 12.2, 3.7, 28.7, 23.2, 4.7, 5.2, 5, 2.6, 14.2, 3.3, 15, 7.9

-2015
0, 15, 4.4, 12.8, 26.8, 2.9, 5.4, 30.8, 18.4, 16.9, 25.6, 10.9, 19.1

-2016
6.3, 3, 9.5, 5.3, 13.4, 1.5, 24.9, 5.1

-2017 (through week 7)
8.3, 4, 25.6, 2.2, 0, 1.6, 5.7

That's 19 "startable" weeks out of a possible 44 games played, just over 43% of the time. If you don't like my arbitrary score of 10 you could lower it to 8 and that would still only be 21 out of 44 weeks, 47.7% of the time. Talented or not, athletic or not, targeted or not, Watkins is putting up subpar performances >50% of the time for your fantasy team. As a guy who is still (or was until the past couple weeks) widely viewed as "if he plays, you start him" he is losing you more weeks than he's winning.

Great post, thank you for the work that went into it!

I actually think you and I are on the same page, even though I would classify myself as a "Sammy truther"

Ever since week 1 of last year, you're absolutely right he's been very up & down and mostly down. That's seriously concerning to me.

But his first 2 years in the league, he was mostly really good and that's not even taking into account the fact that he was a rookie (and then Sophomore) doing what he was doing! That's what gives me hope. This isn't Devante Parker, where he's flashed a couple games and a few plays but he's never consistently won you weeks. Sammy HAS put it all together, but unfortunately his career arc has gone the wrong way since 2015.

[Cameron Giles]

He was getting open and Goff was just missing him badly. The guy can ball like the best of them, he just gets limited quality targets.

Yep. Watkins looks good on tape. He's explosive, can still beat anyone deep, his routes are very good and he's sure-handed. Watkins can win at all levels of the field. But, the chemistry with Goff isn't there and Goff is better at hitting the short/intermediate routes than going deep. Yesterday, Watkins shook Patrick Peterson on a double move going into the endzone, but Goff threw to the corner. Watkins could've easily run the wrong route there though.

But, you look back and see things like this:

https://twitter.com/twitter/statuses/920721764199665670
https://twitter.com/BluMambaSports/stat ... 0424344576

That doesn't look like a WR that's washed up.

I don't expect anything to change though. The Rams are winning and their gameplan works.

[thebeast]

Sammy is fine. Goff needs to develop beyond safe options and they will be fine. Goff is on a good trajectory. Buy low if you can.