Worried about? Sammy edition...

[Cabana]

Give the man WR1 targets and he's a WR1. I said it earlier, and I'll say it again, fantasy is all about opportunity and health, if he ends up putting both together for a stretch a lot of people in here will eat their words.

Sammy haters: 1

Truthers: 0

This debate is still TBD, tho. Sammy is younger than some rookies this year. Stay healthy big fella.

Is this true though? I dont have the numbers but if we extrapolate his current targets to reflect WR1targets would he be putting up WR 1 numbers?

So far, he has 29 targets for 18/264/2, if we extrapolate his targets to WR1 numbers (~140 targets), he would be 87/1275/10.

[nathanq42]

lets call WR1 targets at 160

Catch% = 62.1%

YPR = 14.7

160*62.1% = 99.36 ~ 99 Catches

99*14.7 = 1455.3 Yards in a season with '"WR1" targets Plus a random # of TDs, not too shabby

https://www.pro-football-reference.com/ ... tkSa00.htm

[Oddball456]

Give the man WR1 targets and he's a WR1. I said it earlier, and I'll say it again, fantasy is all about opportunity and health, if he ends up putting both together for a stretch a lot of people in here will eat their words.

Sammy haters: 1

Truthers: 0

This debate is still TBD, tho. Sammy is younger than some rookies this year. Stay healthy big fella.

Is this true though? I dont have the numbers but if we extrapolate his current targets to reflect WR1targets would he be putting up WR 1 numbers?

Well, in a PPR so far Sammy has put up 56.4 points on 29 targets, or 1.94 points per target. Using the top 12 WR from last year the average number of targets I found to be 137.5 targets. If Sammy got that number of targets, he would be at 267 points for the year. From what a quick PPR scoring search for 2016 AB was top with 307 points, Hilton was 5th with 274 and Julio was 6th with 260.

So based on the results for Sammy so far this year compared to the league results from last year, yes, he would be an solid WR1 if he got WR1 targets.

[Servo]

I posted this under another Watkins thread a few weeks ago:
Garcon - 1,000 yards
DJax - 1,000 yards
Crowder - 800 yards
Reed - 600-700 yards
Davis - 500-600 yards
Thompson - 300-400 yards

Clearly, McVay spreads the ball, and above was based on Cousins throwing for nearly 5,000 yards last year. We've already seen this in LA with Woods, Watkins, Kupp, Higbee, Gurley being the lead target/receiver on a given week.

All in all, Watkins owners want him showered with targets and Sammy to me is clearly talented but it's just not the offense that calls for that kind of play calling...at least for right now."

[StableOfRBs]

Give the man WR1 targets and he's a WR1. I said it earlier, and I'll say it again, fantasy is all about opportunity and health, if he ends up putting both together for a stretch a lot of people in here will eat their words.

Sammy haters: 1

Truthers: 0

This debate is still TBD, tho. Sammy is younger than some rookies this year. Stay healthy big fella.

Is this true though? I dont have the numbers but if we extrapolate his current targets to reflect WR1targets would he be putting up WR 1 numbers?

I did the numbers the other day, if he got 140 targets which is like the average for the top 12 WRs last year (although it was generally considered a down year for WRs all around) he'd have around 80-1250-8 or 9 so he'd probably end the year as a low WR1 but you could also say that about a lot of WRs in the league, there were even several last year that had <130 targets so it's certainly not out of the question.

My issue with Watkins has never been his "on pace" or end of year totals, it's that he kills you week to week because his production is so weighted to a few games a year and 90% of people will start him every week even though he gives you duds >50% of the time. Finishing the year as a WR1 means bleep all to me if all your points are loaded into like 4 games and you either don't get me to the playoffs or don't help me in the playoffs.

As for the age argument that's kind of silly, he's 24 and iirc out of the entire draft there were only 2 WRs who were 24 and none who were 25 and of those 2 the only one I know for sure is older than Watkins is his teammate Cooper Kupp who is literally a day older. Not to mention that there are better/more consistent options than Watkins who are younger right now and have no injury concerns.

[nathanq42]

TBH all that matters to me (and should to you) is how he looks on the field, I made a thread earlier in the year asking for those who have seen watkins play this year, does he look good? the majority of the responses were that yes, he looks good and usually beats his coverage, just doesn't get the looks from goff.

And if he is consistently winning his match up the numbers will come.

viewtopic.php?f=5&t=149134&p=1339375&hi ... t#p1339375

[Ruggenater]

I posted this under another Watkins thread a few weeks ago:
Garcon - 1,000 yards
DJax - 1,000 yards
Crowder - 800 yards
Reed - 600-700 yards
Davis - 500-600 yards
Thompson - 300-400 yards

Clearly, McVay spreads the ball, and above was based on Cousins throwing for nearly 5,000 yards last year. We've already seen this in LA with Woods, Watkins, Kupp, Higbee, Gurley being the lead target/receiver on a given week.

All in all, Watkins owners want him showered with targets and Sammy to me is clearly talented but it's just not the offense that calls for that kind of play calling...at least for right now."

Yeah, but I'd expect/want Sammy to be disproportionately targeted as he's clearly a superior option to Woods, Kupp, and Higbee. The difference with Washington is none of those guys were ever the WR1 type.

[StableOfRBs]

Give the man WR1 targets and he's a WR1. I said it earlier, and I'll say it again, fantasy is all about opportunity and health, if he ends up putting both together for a stretch a lot of people in here will eat their words.

Sammy haters: 1

Truthers: 0

This debate is still TBD, tho. Sammy is younger than some rookies this year. Stay healthy big fella.

Is this true though? I dont have the numbers but if we extrapolate his current targets to reflect WR1targets would he be putting up WR 1 numbers?

Well, in a PPR so far Sammy has put up 56.4 points on 29 targets, or 1.94 points per target. Using the top 12 WR from last year the average number of targets I found to be 137.5 targets. If Sammy got that number of targets, he would be at 267 points for the year. From what a quick PPR scoring search for 2016 AB was top with 307 points, Hilton was 5th with 274 and Julio was 6th with 260.

So based on the results for Sammy so far this year compared to the league results from last year, yes, he would be an solid WR1 if he got WR1 targets.

If you do this experiment while excluding week 3 Watkins is on pace for 174 ppr points (or the WR41 last year), which is precisely the issue with owning Watkins, he has 0 consistency as a fantasy option. A lot of people will make the "but the game happened, you can't take it away" argument, and you're right, I don't knock a player for having good games or putting up points but looking at the big picture and ignoring how they got those totals is incredibly misleading for some players and Watkins is definitely one of them.

7 targets against a bad defense on Thursday night shouldn't make the difference between the WR6 and the WR41.

[cweds]

If you do this experiment while excluding week 3 Watkins is on pace for 174 ppr points (or the WR41 last year), which is precisely the issue with owning Watkins, he has 0 consistency as a fantasy option. A lot of people will make the "but the game happened, you can't take it away" argument, and you're right, I don't knock a player for having good games or putting up points but looking at the big picture and ignoring how they got those totals is incredibly misleading for some players and Watkins is definitely one of them.

7 targets against a bad defense on Thursday night shouldn't make the difference between the WR6 and the WR41.

Don't tell Amari

[Oddball456]

Is this true though? I dont have the numbers but if we extrapolate his current targets to reflect WR1targets would he be putting up WR 1 numbers?

Well, in a PPR so far Sammy has put up 56.4 points on 29 targets, or 1.94 points per target. Using the top 12 WR from last year the average number of targets I found to be 137.5 targets. If Sammy got that number of targets, he would be at 267 points for the year. From what a quick PPR scoring search for 2016 AB was top with 307 points, Hilton was 5th with 274 and Julio was 6th with 260.

So based on the results for Sammy so far this year compared to the league results from last year, yes, he would be an solid WR1 if he got WR1 targets.

If you do this experiment while excluding week 3 Watkins is on pace for 174 ppr points (or the WR41 last year), which is precisely the issue with owning Watkins, he has 0 consistency as a fantasy option. A lot of people will make the "but the game happened, you can't take it away" argument, and you're right, I don't knock a player for having good games or putting up points but looking at the big picture and ignoring how they got those totals is incredibly misleading for some players and Watkins is definitely one of them.

7 targets against a bad defense on Thursday night shouldn't make the difference between the WR6 and the WR41.

And by excluding his week 3 game you make it even more misleading as you remove the only good game he has had this year instead of taking the numbers as they are. The experiment was "if he got WR1 targets" which would be ~9 targets per game. He is just over 4 targets so far this year with the 7 targets of week 3 being his high. So, if he was getting 2x as many targets as he has been getting, those 5-10 point weeks become 10-20 points a weeks.

I own Sammy and I totally understand the issue of his weekly output; I have decide to put him in vs the choices like T Lockett, Robbie Anderson, JMatt. I figured at the start of the year might be a little slow due to a new team, etc. but so far it hasn't been a fun ride. Hopefully after the bye week he can get more consistent output each week.

[StableOfRBs]

Well, in a PPR so far Sammy has put up 56.4 points on 29 targets, or 1.94 points per target. Using the top 12 WR from last year the average number of targets I found to be 137.5 targets. If Sammy got that number of targets, he would be at 267 points for the year. From what a quick PPR scoring search for 2016 AB was top with 307 points, Hilton was 5th with 274 and Julio was 6th with 260.

So based on the results for Sammy so far this year compared to the league results from last year, yes, he would be an solid WR1 if he got WR1 targets.

If you do this experiment while excluding week 3 Watkins is on pace for 174 ppr points (or the WR41 last year), which is precisely the issue with owning Watkins, he has 0 consistency as a fantasy option. A lot of people will make the "but the game happened, you can't take it away" argument, and you're right, I don't knock a player for having good games or putting up points but looking at the big picture and ignoring how they got those totals is incredibly misleading for some players and Watkins is definitely one of them.

7 targets against a bad defense on Thursday night shouldn't make the difference between the WR6 and the WR41.

And by excluding his week 3 game you make it even more misleading as you remove the only good game he has had this year instead of taking the numbers as they are. The experiment was "if he got WR1 targets" which would be ~9 targets per game. He is just over 4 targets so far this year with the 7 targets of week 3 being his high. So, if he was getting 2x as many targets as he has been getting, those 5-10 point weeks become 10-20 points a weeks.

I own Sammy and I totally understand the issue of his weekly output; I have decide to put him in vs the choices like T Lockett, Robbie Anderson, JMatt. I figured at the start of the year might be a little slow due to a new team, etc. but so far it hasn't been a fun ride. Hopefully after the bye week he can get more consistent output each week.

Well considering week 3 is a one game sample size vs. the other 6 weeks of the season that would make it much more of an outlier than a reliable result to base a conclusion off of so it's definitely not making it more misleading.

Median PPR points per game this year (since someone said they thought it might be a useful stat): 5.0
Avg PPR points per game this year: 8.1
Avg PPR points per game this year without week 3: 4.6
Targets per game this year: 4.1
Targets per game this year without week 3: 3.7
Avg targets per game for a WR1: 8.6
Avg PPR points per game for a top 12 WR: 17.2

Avg PPR points per game as "true" WR1 target based on this year's numbers: 17.0/game
Avg PPR points per game as "true" WR1 target based on this year's numbers excluding week 3: 10.7/game

Week 3 isn't a huge outlier for his targets/game, the difference is literally less than .5 targets per game but it's a massive outlier for his points per game, the difference is 3.5 points, aka a 76% increase in the average because of 1 game.

If you'd like we can even take out week 5, his worst game of the year, 4 targets, 0 points. Then his PPR ppg average becomes 5.56 (a 20.9% increase) and his target per game average becomes 3.6, still not even close to the outlier that week 3 was for him this year. Removing outliers (especially huge ones) is a better way to find the true average/value of the results of something than to take it at face value despite how skewed the results might be.

And just for fun his Avg PPR points per game with WR1 targets based on this year's numbers excluding both week 3 and week 5: 13.3/game

[Cameron Giles]

Yeah, but I'd expect/want Sammy to be disproportionately targeted as he's clearly a superior option to Woods, Kupp, and Higbee. The difference with Washington is none of those guys were ever the WR1 type.

This is key. Watkins is widely viewed as the Rams best WR and Les Snead gave up a 2nd round pick to get him. McVay's offense is built around the open man and taking what the defense concedes. However, you would think that adjustments can be made to include a talent like Watkins. You wouldn't trade for someone like T.Y. Hilton or Michael Thomas and just make him another guy in your offense.

Watkins has 29 targets on the season. That's the same volume as:

Seth Roberts
Taylor Gabriel
Kenny Britt
Terrance Williams
Ted Ginn
Kendall Wright
Torrey Smith
T.J. Jones
Bennie Fowler
Rashard Higgins

Seriously. For all intents and purposes, Sammy Watkins is not fantasy relevant. His talent is not even close to proportional to his volume. He has 15 targets since his big game against the 49ers in Week 3. That's not even in the Top 100 of players during that span.

[Oddball456]

If you do this experiment while excluding week 3 Watkins is on pace for 174 ppr points (or the WR41 last year), which is precisely the issue with owning Watkins, he has 0 consistency as a fantasy option. A lot of people will make the "but the game happened, you can't take it away" argument, and you're right, I don't knock a player for having good games or putting up points but looking at the big picture and ignoring how they got those totals is incredibly misleading for some players and Watkins is definitely one of them.

7 targets against a bad defense on Thursday night shouldn't make the difference between the WR6 and the WR41.

And by excluding his week 3 game you make it even more misleading as you remove the only good game he has had this year instead of taking the numbers as they are. The experiment was "if he got WR1 targets" which would be ~9 targets per game. He is just over 4 targets so far this year with the 7 targets of week 3 being his high. So, if he was getting 2x as many targets as he has been getting, those 5-10 point weeks become 10-20 points a weeks.

I own Sammy and I totally understand the issue of his weekly output; I have decide to put him in vs the choices like T Lockett, Robbie Anderson, JMatt. I figured at the start of the year might be a little slow due to a new team, etc. but so far it hasn't been a fun ride. Hopefully after the bye week he can get more consistent output each week.

Well considering week 3 is a one game sample size vs. the other 6 weeks of the season that would make it much more of an outlier than a reliable result to base a conclusion off of so it's definitely not making it more misleading.

Median PPR points per game this year (since someone said they thought it might be a useful stat): 5.0
Avg PPR points per game this year: 8.1
Avg PPR points per game this year without week 3: 4.6
Targets per game this year: 4.1
Targets per game this year without week 3: 3.7
Avg targets per game for a WR1: 8.6
Avg PPR points per game for a top 12 WR: 17.2

Avg PPR points per game as "true" WR1 target based on this year's numbers: 17.0/game
Avg PPR points per game as "true" WR1 target based on this year's numbers excluding week 3: 10.7/game

Week 3 isn't a huge outlier for his targets/game, the difference is literally less than .5 targets per game but it's a massive outlier for his points per game, the difference is 3.5 points, aka a 76% increase in the average because of 1 game.

If you'd like we can even take out week 5, his worst game of the year, 4 targets, 0 points. Then his PPR ppg average becomes 5.56 (a 20.9% increase) and his target per game average becomes 3.6, still not even close to the outlier that week 3 was for him this year. Removing outliers (especially huge ones) is a better way to find the true average/value of the results of something than to take it at face value despite how skewed the results might be.

And just for fun his Avg PPR points per game with WR1 targets based on this year's numbers excluding both week 3 and week 5: 13.3/game

Sammy's Point Per Target over his career:
2014: 1.56 ppt
2015: 2.35 ppt
2016: 1.60 ppt
2017: 1.94 ppt
For his career he has 558.2 points on 302 targets: 1.85ppt

Math by StableOfRBs: 1.24 ppt based on 174 points on 140 targets.

Please tell me how including all of the data which gives 1.94 ppt (compared to a career ave of 1.85ppt) is "incredibly misleading" but your way of excluding results is somehow more accurate with a 1.24 ppt (compared to a career ave of 1.85ppt).

You cherry pick data and throw out some random numbers some of which make no sense.

"Week 3 isn't a huge outlier for his targets/game, the difference is literally less than .5 targets per game but it's a massive outlier for his points per game, the difference is 3.5 points, aka a 76% increase in the average because of 1 game." Ave # of targets per game this year = 4.1. # of targets week 3 = 7. So week 3 he saw 2.9 more targets than average or a 71% increase. And those values include week 3 with the 7 targets. No clue what you mean by "the difference is literally less than .5 targets per game". As for his point output week 3 being was much higher of course it was, he had the only 2 TD grabs of the season in that one game.

Edit: I figured out what you meant to say, "Week 3 isn't a huge...." should say "The average including Week 3 isn't a huge...." but in that case you don't seem to understand the word "outlier"

[StableOfRBs]

And by excluding his week 3 game you make it even more misleading as you remove the only good game he has had this year instead of taking the numbers as they are. The experiment was "if he got WR1 targets" which would be ~9 targets per game. He is just over 4 targets so far this year with the 7 targets of week 3 being his high. So, if he was getting 2x as many targets as he has been getting, those 5-10 point weeks become 10-20 points a weeks.

I own Sammy and I totally understand the issue of his weekly output; I have decide to put him in vs the choices like T Lockett, Robbie Anderson, JMatt. I figured at the start of the year might be a little slow due to a new team, etc. but so far it hasn't been a fun ride. Hopefully after the bye week he can get more consistent output each week.

Well considering week 3 is a one game sample size vs. the other 6 weeks of the season that would make it much more of an outlier than a reliable result to base a conclusion off of so it's definitely not making it more misleading.

Median PPR points per game this year (since someone said they thought it might be a useful stat): 5.0
Avg PPR points per game this year: 8.1
Avg PPR points per game this year without week 3: 4.6
Targets per game this year: 4.1
Targets per game this year without week 3: 3.7
Avg targets per game for a WR1: 8.6
Avg PPR points per game for a top 12 WR: 17.2

Avg PPR points per game as "true" WR1 target based on this year's numbers: 17.0/game
Avg PPR points per game as "true" WR1 target based on this year's numbers excluding week 3: 10.7/game

Week 3 isn't a huge outlier for his targets/game, the difference is literally less than .5 targets per game but it's a massive outlier for his points per game, the difference is 3.5 points, aka a 76% increase in the average because of 1 game.

If you'd like we can even take out week 5, his worst game of the year, 4 targets, 0 points. Then his PPR ppg average becomes 5.56 (a 20.9% increase) and his target per game average becomes 3.6, still not even close to the outlier that week 3 was for him this year. Removing outliers (especially huge ones) is a better way to find the true average/value of the results of something than to take it at face value despite how skewed the results might be.

And just for fun his Avg PPR points per game with WR1 targets based on this year's numbers excluding both week 3 and week 5: 13.3/game

Sammy's Point Per Target over his career:
2014: 1.56 ppt
2015: 2.35 ppt
2016: 1.60 ppt
2017: 1.94 ppt
For his career he has 558.2 points on 302 targets: 1.85ppt

Math by StableOfRBs: 1.24 ppt based on 174 points on 140 targets.

Please tell me how including all of the data which gives 1.94 ppt (compared to a career ave of 1.85ppt) is "incredibly misleading" but your way of excluding results is somehow more accurate with a 1.24 ppt (compared to a career ave of 1.85ppt).

You cherry pick data and throw out some random numbers some of which make no sense.

"Week 3 isn't a huge outlier for his targets/game, the difference is literally less than .5 targets per game but it's a massive outlier for his points per game, the difference is 3.5 points, aka a 76% increase in the average because of 1 game." Ave # of targets per game this year = 4.1. # of targets week 3 = 7. So week 3 he saw 2.9 more targets than average or a 71% increase. And those values include week 3 with the 7 targets. No clue what you mean by "the difference is literally less than .5 targets per game". As for his point output week 3 being was much higher of course it was, he had the only 2 TD grabs of the season in that one game.

Edit: I figured out what you meant to say, "Week 3 isn't a huge...." should say "The average including Week 3 isn't a huge...." but in that case you don't seem to understand the word "outlier"

Because someone asked if we extrapolated his current targets, not his targets over his career, the ones he's getting now from the team and an he will likely be with for the next few seasons assuming the Rams pony up any of the massive cap space they have to retain him

Your entire point about the point/target argument is exactly the reason I've never liked Watkins as a fantasy option, his totals look great, his averages look great, his "on pace" numbers look great, but He is incredibly inconsistent week to week, yes maybe he does have almost 1.9 points per target over his career but when he's giving you substandard numbers for over half of his games he's not the wr1 people think he is no matter how you try to average it out

If you relied on players that had the same consistency of Watkins at every position your record would average out to 6-7 or 7-9 depending on how you do your league, that's maybe good enough to sneak a wildcard spot in some years but those are terrible averages (Sammy Watkins has about as much of a chance of putting up startable wr1 numbers in ppr as Jeff "Mr. 7-9" Fisher did of winning a game over his coaching career with the rams)

Just in case you want to see the math:
Career likelihood of putting up at least 10 ppr points in a given week - 43% (did that math in a previous post)

Now, assuming you start every player with that probability of startable weeks and win the games they put up those numbers that's .43 x 16 games = 6.88 wins or .43 x 13 games = 5.59 wins, rounding up that's 6 or 7 wins each year and that's not good

Fantasy is a week to week game, unless you play only best ball leagues then the season end totals (and averages) aren't as important as the game by game stats and in that case consistency as a starting option is a huge factor in a players fantasy success

*wrote this on my phone so it's probably gonna have a lot of weird autocorrected things that might make it read strangely, my bad*

[nathanq42]

I wonder is Sammy Watkins believes in this math...