WR Point Score Database Results

[alewilliam789]

Hello guys!
As promised I've added my WR Point Score System Results below in the spreadsheet. On it it has every player that I can obtain data on that has ever qualified as a stud prospect and how each point tier has fared. While I don't have my point system on here, I left all my equations that calculate these totals and percentages open for everybody to see so that there aren't any illusions or deception.

This goes back to 1998, but I can actually get Breakout age data (if I don't have this can't calculate point score) and pro-day/combine data up until 2001/2000.

I developed this myself and have charted this all myself with a lot of time invested into this. I'm not saying to take my system as gospel, but so far statistically it looks like it has at least some sort of predictive ability.

There are two sources of error here:

1 - When calculating DR you can't always know how much any one quarterback was in the game with a receiver. Therefore, I usually calculate all DRs with the sum of the two leading passers for that year. If there are multiple passers I'll generally go up to the 3rd.

2 - While my system can predict any player with Breakout age data, sometimes I don't have all the numbers for prospects from the early 2000s. While this may mean I'm missing maybe 3-5 players that may have been busts, it shouldn't change the hit rates more than 5% and wouldn't change the hit rates for the 70+ prospect range.

Stipulations I've made:
-Any player that has hit once neither counts as a hit or a miss.
-Any player that hasn't broken out in the 4 year window (Calculated that almost 90%+ of WRs break out in this time frame)
is considered a bust.
-There are players here who didn't work out. to calculate the athletic portion of the point score I use ranges I've established for "stud" WRs. For all players that don't workout, I just gave them below average athletic scores for each drill they don't perform in. Because I do this for all drills that players don't compete in it evens out.


So here's the link hope you guys geek out and enjoy:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

[Shankopotamus]

Thanks for posting, and especially for the work that went into this. Projection for Wrs is the hardest thing for me personally.


Where does the 2020 class stack up?

[Dynasty DeLorean]

I’m briefly trying to look on my phone, can you maybe give a little more info as to what I’m looking at here. What do the numbers mean next to the players. Also, do you calculate thing differently for different heights or you just grouped them that way. Also, at what point if any were you projecting forward with this model?

[Johnny B. Goode]

This is awesome. I'd like to share my spreadsheet with you so we can compare...

[Blueboy]

Very useful, thanks for sharing man.

[alewilliam789]

I’m briefly trying to look on my phone, can you maybe give a little more info as to what I’m looking at here. What do the numbers mean next to the players. Also, do you calculate thing differently for different heights or you just grouped them that way. Also, at what point if any were you projecting forward with this model?

So the numbers next to these players are the total point scores of these players. These total point scores are created by assigning point values to certain aspects of a WRs profile relating to breakour age, draft capital, and Final DR & Career DR.

The study found that the minimum point score needed to qualify as a stud prospect was 53. As you can see with each tier there’s a substantial percentage increase in hit rate between each tier. All these hit rates and tiers actually arose out of the system’s data itself not something I made this way.

The reason I have it separated by height is due to how I created the athleticism grade for the point system. I used average/ranges of separate drills (minus extreme outliers which I found using basically a distance formula with points) of the top elite WRs over the past 10 years before 2018. Basicallly there’s a reasonable low that I found, an average, and then any value above that is above average and grades the highest. These are separated among the stated heights because you can’t judge a 6’3” WR on the same level as a 5’10” one obviously.

I actually made this in 2018 after the draft and have been projecting ever since. To get these points I’ve literally combed through every draft that has the data for every drafted WR and plugged in all their data. So it’s not like I just used the past WRs and am trying to test forward. I’ve literally tested every data point I can get my hands on to successfully test the system.

I wanted this thing to be as objective/study like as much as possible so I can try to use this data basically as an unbiased source

[alewilliam789]

Thanks for posting, and especially for the work that went into this. Projection for Wrs is the hardest thing for me personally.


Where does the 2020 class stack up?

Actually it didn’t grade anywhere close to 2019. From the sheet you can see that there was 6 prospects from the 2019 draft. Right now, without knowing the draft capital, there are at least 2 60 level prospects and with some first round capital we could see more.

None of the top WRs (Lamb/Juedy) in 2020 profile qualified as stud.

In 2019 AJ Brown, DK Metcalf, and N’Keal Harry all graded out as stud prospects to varying degrees.

[Shankopotamus]

I'd assume Mims and Lamb have the highest grades so far.

[Johnny B. Goode]

I like the idea of not counting wrs who have hit only once. One thing I found is that if a guy who did NOT have a strong predictive score, but still hit, chances were very high he would not have many years of continued success as a top 24 wr. There are a small number who did (Brandon Marshall, Roddy White, Michael Thomas, Tyreek Hill to name some), but there are more that just had one or two years. I believe there were only 14 or so in the last 10 years that did not have a favorable rating in my formula, and still hit at least once. I did not remove those 1 time hits because I knew people would ride my rear end for it.

I also like bringing in size and other measurables, but I dont put a lot of stock into that. Hand size is something I would like to factor in, even though I recall reading an article last year that was kind of old but said hand size doesnt matter at all for production. Also, the equations were a nightmare... not sure I want to go there again

Guys like Deebo and McLaurin from 2019 are hot names this offseason. I've taken the unpopular stance that they are fantastic sells right now. I don't see them on the OPs link, but I am looking on my phone and don't think I'm getting the full picture here.

[alewilliam789]

I like the idea of not counting wrs who have hit only once. One thing I found is that if a guy who did NOT have a strong predictive score, but still hit, chances were very high he would not have many years of continued success as a top 24 wr. There are a small number who did (Brandon Marshall, Roddy White, Michael Thomas, Tyreek Hill to name some), but there are more that just had one or two years. I believe there were only 14 or so in the last 10 years that did not have a favorable rating in my formula, and still hit at least once. I did not remove those 1 time hits because I knew people would ride my rear end for it.

I also like bringing in size and other measurables, but I dont put a lot of stock into that. Hand size is something I would like to factor in, even though I recall reading an article last year that was kind of old but said hand size doesnt matter at all for production. Also, the equations were a nightmare... not sure I want to go there again

Guys like Deebo and McLaurin from 2019 are hot names this offseason. I've taken the unpopular stance that they are fantastic sells right now. I don't see them on the OPs link, but I am looking on my phone and don't think I'm getting the full picture here.

Nope McLaurin never had a breakout age neither the DR.
Deebo was close both for the BA or DR.

[Sriracha]

I like the idea of not counting wrs who have hit only once. One thing I found is that if a guy who did NOT have a strong predictive score, but still hit, chances were very high he would not have many years of continued success as a top 24 wr. There are a small number who did (Brandon Marshall, Roddy White, Michael Thomas, Tyreek Hill to name some), but there are more that just had one or two years. I believe there were only 14 or so in the last 10 years that did not have a favorable rating in my formula, and still hit at least once. I did not remove those 1 time hits because I knew people would ride my rear end for it.

I also like bringing in size and other measurables, but I dont put a lot of stock into that. Hand size is something I would like to factor in, even though I recall reading an article last year that was kind of old but said hand size doesnt matter at all for production. Also, the equations were a nightmare... not sure I want to go there again

Guys like Deebo and McLaurin from 2019 are hot names this offseason. I've taken the unpopular stance that they are fantastic sells right now. I don't see them on the OPs link, but I am looking on my phone and don't think I'm getting the full picture here.

Nope McLaurin never had a breakout age neither the DR.
Deebo was close both for the BA or DR.

Deebo also shared the field with Bryan Edwards, so depending on how he does in the NFL that could be a mitigating factor for his DR being lower than you'd expect.

[Johnny B. Goode]

I like the idea of not counting wrs who have hit only once. One thing I found is that if a guy who did NOT have a strong predictive score, but still hit, chances were very high he would not have many years of continued success as a top 24 wr. There are a small number who did (Brandon Marshall, Roddy White, Michael Thomas, Tyreek Hill to name some), but there are more that just had one or two years. I believe there were only 14 or so in the last 10 years that did not have a favorable rating in my formula, and still hit at least once. I did not remove those 1 time hits because I knew people would ride my rear end for it.

I also like bringing in size and other measurables, but I dont put a lot of stock into that. Hand size is something I would like to factor in, even though I recall reading an article last year that was kind of old but said hand size doesnt matter at all for production. Also, the equations were a nightmare... not sure I want to go there again

Guys like Deebo and McLaurin from 2019 are hot names this offseason. I've taken the unpopular stance that they are fantastic sells right now. I don't see them on the OPs link, but I am looking on my phone and don't think I'm getting the full picture here.

Nope McLaurin never had a breakout age neither the DR.
Deebo was close both for the BA or DR.

Deebo also shared the field with Bryan Edwards, so depending on how he does in the NFL that could be a mitigating factor for his DR being lower than you'd expect.

Actually, for me his DR wasnt bad. It was his Breakout Age, which just missed my cut off, so I wouldnt be surprised if he was a hit.

[MEuRaH]

Hello guys!
As promised I've added my WR Point Score System Results below in the spreadsheet. On it it has every player that I can obtain data on that has ever qualified as a stud prospect and how each point tier has fared. While I don't have my point system on here, I left all my equations that calculate these totals and percentages open for everybody to see so that there aren't any illusions or deception.

This goes back to 1998, but I can actually get Breakout age data (if I don't have this can't calculate point score) and pro-day/combine data up until 2001/2000.

I developed this myself and have charted this all myself with a lot of time invested into this. I'm not saying to take my system as gospel, but so far statistically it looks like it has at least some sort of predictive ability.

There are two sources of error here:

1 - When calculating DR you can't always know how much any one quarterback was in the game with a receiver. Therefore, I usually calculate all DRs with the sum of the two leading passers for that year. If there are multiple passers I'll generally go up to the 3rd.

2 - While my system can predict any player with Breakout age data, sometimes I don't have all the numbers for prospects from the early 2000s. While this may mean I'm missing maybe 3-5 players that may have been busts, it shouldn't change the hit rates more than 5% and wouldn't change the hit rates for the 70+ prospect range.

Stipulations I've made:
-Any player that has hit once neither counts as a hit or a miss.
-Any player that hasn't broken out in the 4 year window (Calculated that almost 90%+ of WRs break out in this time frame)
is considered a bust.
-There are players here who didn't work out. to calculate the athletic portion of the point score I use ranges I've established for "stud" WRs. For all players that don't workout, I just gave them below average athletic scores for each drill they don't perform in. Because I do this for all drills that players don't compete in it evens out.


So here's the link hope you guys geek out and enjoy:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

OK I've looked at this a few times and I keep drawing conclusions that I don't think you mean to be established. Before I go any further, can you give me the bottom line you want readers like me to takeaway?

You said "As Promised", which is in reference to an earlier post. Could you please link that?

[alewilliam789]

Hello guys!
As promised I've added my WR Point Score System Results below in the spreadsheet. On it it has every player that I can obtain data on that has ever qualified as a stud prospect and how each point tier has fared. While I don't have my point system on here, I left all my equations that calculate these totals and percentages open for everybody to see so that there aren't any illusions or deception.

This goes back to 1998, but I can actually get Breakout age data (if I don't have this can't calculate point score) and pro-day/combine data up until 2001/2000.

I developed this myself and have charted this all myself with a lot of time invested into this. I'm not saying to take my system as gospel, but so far statistically it looks like it has at least some sort of predictive ability.

There are two sources of error here:

1 - When calculating DR you can't always know how much any one quarterback was in the game with a receiver. Therefore, I usually calculate all DRs with the sum of the two leading passers for that year. If there are multiple passers I'll generally go up to the 3rd.

2 - While my system can predict any player with Breakout age data, sometimes I don't have all the numbers for prospects from the early 2000s. While this may mean I'm missing maybe 3-5 players that may have been busts, it shouldn't change the hit rates more than 5% and wouldn't change the hit rates for the 70+ prospect range.

Stipulations I've made:
-Any player that has hit once neither counts as a hit or a miss.
-Any player that hasn't broken out in the 4 year window (Calculated that almost 90%+ of WRs break out in this time frame)
is considered a bust.
-There are players here who didn't work out. to calculate the athletic portion of the point score I use ranges I've established for "stud" WRs. For all players that don't workout, I just gave them below average athletic scores for each drill they don't perform in. Because I do this for all drills that players don't compete in it evens out.


So here's the link hope you guys geek out and enjoy:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing

OK I've looked at this a few times and I keep drawing conclusions that I don't think you mean to be established. Before I go any further, can you give me the bottom line you want readers like me to takeaway?

You said "As Promised", which is in reference to an earlier post. Could you please link that?

Well basically these numbers/calculators show you that the system itself seems to have a much better hit rate because it:
1. Already filters an entire draft to maybe 3-5 players that would qualify to become top PPR performers.
2. Has pretty good success at finding which WRs will hit. The tiers are broken down by hit rate. Even if you take away 5% (which I think this would be way overestimating the error) off each tier you would create a system that at the lowest tier 54% of stud prospects would hit, second highest tier would be 70%, and the final would have 80% of all the WRs hit. This hit rate is only among the designated “stud” prospects too, so I think it’s much higher odds then drafting WRs any other way.

Also if you look at it, it captures close to 80%+ of all stud players to ever go on to have two top 24 PPR seasons or more. There are some misses, but my god basically like everybody you’ve ever appreciated as a stud is up there including Randy Moss (didn’t think the older generation would follow the same statistical framework so I was kind of shocked).

If you look at 2020 Advanced Metrics thread somebody asked me to show my data and so I made this spreadsheet for them.