Henry Ruggs is Much More Than Speed

[PR0v3]

I'm pretty sure they could have lined him up on the other side of Tua had they so desired. I hope you aren't suggesting the reason his stats were so low is because he had the misfortune of having a left handed QB. (who happened to be one of the best college QB's in years)

Ruggs seems to be one of the most polarizing players in this class. I am not a fan, but there doesn't seem to be a lot of middle ground. People seem to really like him, or really don't like him. I have a tough time seeing him as a WR1 in an offensive scheme, so I will refrain from spending the draft capital required on him. If Ruggs hits, he will be an outlier, but it's certainly possible he becomes one.

An outlier (if he hits) from a breakout age/dominator perspective perhaps, but not really an outlier from a draft capital/skills analysis perspective.

He’ll be my desired target at 1.10 if the draft capital is what many think it will be. The context of his situation cannot be ignored, and he appears to be far more capable than just running straight. He’s exactly the type of player I’d want to target outside the top few picks. All signs point to him being significantly undervalued.

82% of first round picks with his breakout age and dominator rating bust. IMO he still is an outlier even if you factor in draft capital.

I agree he is fun to watch and an athletic freak. It's hard to nlglwatch his highlights and not get excited. I have some concerns about his separation and why he wasnt more involved in that offense. He isnt the first WR to be surrounded with great talent; the cream always rises to the top

What % of players with his level of skill and ability bust?
His dominator and breakout age are obviously impacted by the talent he shared the field with.

[Johnny B. Goode]

An outlier (if he hits) from a breakout age/dominator perspective perhaps, but not really an outlier from a draft capital/skills analysis perspective.

He’ll be my desired target at 1.10 if the draft capital is what many think it will be. The context of his situation cannot be ignored, and he appears to be far more capable than just running straight. He’s exactly the type of player I’d want to target outside the top few picks. All signs point to him being significantly undervalued.

82% of first round picks with his breakout age and dominator rating bust. IMO he still is an outlier even if you factor in draft capital.

I agree he is fun to watch and an athletic freak. It's hard to nlglwatch his highlights and not get excited. I have some concerns about his separation and why he wasnt more involved in that offense. He isnt the first WR to be surrounded with great talent; the cream always rises to the top

What % of players with his level of skill and ability bust?
His dominator and breakout age are obviously impacted by the talent he shared the field with.

That's a very subjective statement, said with absolute certainty as if its objective fact.

Was it impacted? What about the players shared the field with other top prospects in the history of the NCAA? We can't say for certain it was impacted. Typically the best players get the ball the most often.

Does he have a high skill/ability? That seems to be subjective as well- I'm not aware of a better way to objectively measure skill and ability other than what he scores poorly in. It's an honest question. If there is then I'd be interested to see it. 40 yard dash times dont move the needle for me. John Ross was fast too (FTR, before people fly off the handle and accuse me of comparing him to Ross, and then go on to list 20 reasons why they are different, I am not comparing the two. Just pointing out that 40 time doesnt mean much, at least to me).

Objectively, players with poor dominator ratings and breakout age, whom are also selected in the 1st round, since 2010, bust at a rate of 82%. I can admit looking at it purely from an objective perspective doesnt tell the whole story. I'm an objective person, so I'm going to gravitate toward that line of thinking. However, the stats are the stats. He could very well be someone who bucks the trend. He seems to possess some of those subjective things that would make that a possibility. I have a better chance selecting someone else. I just think hes bound to go to an NFL situation that puts him in a WR2 or slot role, limiting his fantasy upside; he doesn't profile as an NFL WR1 to me. And it's okay to disagree

[OhCruelestRanter]

I've seen two different flavors of pro-Ruggs takes on this board, and on Twitter.

One of them is that Ruggs is an elite athlete with a well rounded skill set, who just happened to play with a phenomenal collection of NFL wide receivers, so his Dominator Rating and Breakout Age might not tell the whole story. This sounds very reasonable.

The other is that Ruggs is better than Jeudy, which I have a really hard time justifying, as Nick Saban and Tua Tagovailoa don't seem to think so.

[Johnny B. Goode]

Anyone pro Ruggs want to comment on his inability to beat press coverage? Seems like, from what I read, when a CB presses him 'he practically disappears from the play"

I imagine he will face more physical corners in the NFL than he did in college, and are likely to press him, especially if this is the known recipe to neutralize him

[PR0v3]

82% of first round picks with his breakout age and dominator rating bust. IMO he still is an outlier even if you factor in draft capital.

I agree he is fun to watch and an athletic freak. It's hard to nlglwatch his highlights and not get excited. I have some concerns about his separation and why he wasnt more involved in that offense. He isnt the first WR to be surrounded with great talent; the cream always rises to the top

What % of players with his level of skill and ability bust?
His dominator and breakout age are obviously impacted by the talent he shared the field with.

That's a very subjective statement, said with absolute certainty as if its objective fact.

Was it impacted? What about the players shared the field with other top prospects in the history of the NCAA? We can't say for certain it was impacted. Typically the best players get the ball the most often.

Does he have a high skill/ability? That seems to be subjective as well- I'm not aware of a better way to objectively measure skill and ability other than what he scores poorly in. It's an honest question. If there is then I'd be interested to see it. 40 yard dash times dont move the needle for me. John Ross was fast too (FTR, before people fly off the handle and accuse me of comparing him to Ross, and then go on to list 20 reasons why they are different, I am not comparing the two. Just pointing out that 40 time doesnt mean much, at least to me).

Objectively, players with poor dominator ratings and breakout age, whom are also selected in the 1st round, since 2010, bust at a rate of 82%. I can admit looking at it purely from an objective perspective doesnt tell the whole story. I'm an objective person, so I'm going to gravitate toward that line of thinking. However, the stats are the stats. He could very well be someone who bucks the trend. He seems to possess some of those subjective things that would make that a possibility. I have a better chance selecting someone else. I just think hes bound to go to an NFL situation that puts him in a WR2 or slot role, limiting his fantasy upside; he doesn't profile as an NFL WR1 to me. And it's okay to disagree

What evidence do you have that this means anything when projecting forward? 100% of Alabama WRs drafted in the first since 2010 have been hits, so why is your dominator rating any better of a measure when looking forward? I’m aware that this has happened in the past, but what reason is there to believe these results have predictive capabilities and how do the players that compose that % compare to Ruggs?

[Cameron Giles]

Does he have a high skill/ability? That seems to be subjective as well- I'm not aware of a better way to objectively measure skill and ability other than what he scores poorly in. It's an honest question. If there is then I'd be interested to see it. 40 yard dash times dont move the needle for me. John Ross was fast too (FTR, before people fly off the handle and accuse me of comparing him to Ross, and then go on to list 20 reasons why they are different, I am not comparing the two. Just pointing out that 40 time doesnt mean much, at least to me).

Objectively, players with poor dominator ratings and breakout age, whom are also selected in the 1st round, since 2010, bust at a rate of 82%. I can admit looking at it purely from an objective perspective doesnt tell the whole story. I'm an objective person, so I'm going to gravitate toward that line of thinking. However, the stats are the stats. He could very well be someone who bucks the trend. He seems to possess some of those subjective things that would make that a possibility. I have a better chance selecting someone else. I just think hes bound to go to an NFL situation that puts him in a WR2 or slot role, limiting his fantasy upside; he doesn't profile as an NFL WR1 to me. And it's okay to disagree

You just admitted it yourself though---market share is not a tell-all stat. Yes, it is a notable stat for fantasy purposes, but it shouldn't be the only thing you weigh when looking at a WR. The NFL certainly doesn't limit themselves to one stat for evaluation or predicting. I feel like when you do that, then we're acting like players are bound to a singular number on the field like they're robots or something. You're only consuming a small part of the pie here.

I agree with you that Ruggs does not have a highly favorable chance like a Mike Evans or a Julio Jones of being a WR1, but it's in his range of practical outcomes and I think it's a noticeable shot.

[Cameron Giles]

Anyone pro Ruggs want to comment on his inability to beat press coverage? Seems like, from what I read, when a CB presses him 'he practically disappears from the play"

I imagine he will face more physical corners in the NFL than he did in college, and are likely to press him, especially if this is the known recipe to neutralize him

Honestly, this is an issue for the majority of WRs who enter college. Beating NFL press is tough. I think it's more important to focus on whether a WR has the traits to one day do it. There's so many things to consider: Explosion, short area burst, hand technique, footwork, suddenness, etc. I think Ruggs definitely has the traits to continue improving there. He's already come a long way as a route runner.

[Jigga94]

82% of first round picks with his breakout age and dominator rating bust. IMO he still is an outlier even if you factor in draft capital.

I agree he is fun to watch and an athletic freak. It's hard to nlglwatch his highlights and not get excited. I have some concerns about his separation and why he wasnt more involved in that offense. He isnt the first WR to be surrounded with great talent; the cream always rises to the top

What % of players with his level of skill and ability bust?
His dominator and breakout age are obviously impacted by the talent he shared the field with.

That's a very subjective statement, said with absolute certainty as if its objective fact.

Was it impacted? What about the players shared the field with other top prospects in the history of the NCAA? We can't say for certain it was impacted. Typically the best players get the ball the most often.

Does he have a high skill/ability? That seems to be subjective as well- I'm not aware of a better way to objectively measure skill and ability other than what he scores poorly in. It's an honest question. If there is then I'd be interested to see it. 40 yard dash times dont move the needle for me. John Ross was fast too (FTR, before people fly off the handle and accuse me of comparing him to Ross, and then go on to list 20 reasons why they are different, I am not comparing the two. Just pointing out that 40 time doesnt mean much, at least to me).

Objectively, players with poor dominator ratings and breakout age, whom are also selected in the 1st round, since 2010, bust at a rate of 82%. I can admit looking at it purely from an objective perspective doesnt tell the whole story. I'm an objective person, so I'm going to gravitate toward that line of thinking. However, the stats are the stats. He could very well be someone who bucks the trend. He seems to possess some of those subjective things that would make that a possibility. I have a better chance selecting someone else. I just think hes bound to go to an NFL situation that puts him in a WR2 or slot role, limiting his fantasy upside; he doesn't profile as an NFL WR1 to me. And it's okay to disagree

Hey not bashing your process or anything here, but can you define bust here again? Was it no top 24 PPR finish at all? Or just 1 season with top 24? Also, would you mind sharing the 18% in that field that are not busts? Do some of those 82% have a solid shot at becoming non-busts? Thanks!

[Ice]

Anyone pro Ruggs want to comment on his inability to beat press coverage? Seems like, from what I read, when a CB presses him 'he practically disappears from the play"

I imagine he will face more physical corners in the NFL than he did in college, and are likely to press him, especially if this is the known recipe to neutralize him

I am certain at the next level teams will be terrified to play too much press coverage on this player. His feet are incredibly quick. When one actually studies Ruggs you will see he excels inside, outside, and in the backfield. Teams will run a ton of motion with this player at the next level. The fact he shows he can play anywhere is a huge plus given the close hash marks in the NFL game.

Every WR that comes into the league is pretty raw. None get anywhere near the coaching in college that they will in the pros.

Ruggs only real weakness is he could stand use his hands a bit more to fight off press coverage but the sky is the limit with this kid. Press coverage isn't a weakness but he could and should learn enough that teams will not want to ever use that technique because his speed will warrant a cushion in the NFL.

Here is a pretty good breakdown on a couple of routes that show just how smooth and advanced he is as a rookie coming into the league.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFNWHFi6Nik

[skinfanjon]

What % of players with his level of skill and ability bust?
His dominator and breakout age are obviously impacted by the talent he shared the field with.

That's a very subjective statement, said with absolute certainty as if its objective fact.

Was it impacted? What about the players shared the field with other top prospects in the history of the NCAA? We can't say for certain it was impacted. Typically the best players get the ball the most often.

Does he have a high skill/ability? That seems to be subjective as well- I'm not aware of a better way to objectively measure skill and ability other than what he scores poorly in. It's an honest question. If there is then I'd be interested to see it. 40 yard dash times dont move the needle for me. John Ross was fast too (FTR, before people fly off the handle and accuse me of comparing him to Ross, and then go on to list 20 reasons why they are different, I am not comparing the two. Just pointing out that 40 time doesnt mean much, at least to me).

Objectively, players with poor dominator ratings and breakout age, whom are also selected in the 1st round, since 2010, bust at a rate of 82%. I can admit looking at it purely from an objective perspective doesnt tell the whole story. I'm an objective person, so I'm going to gravitate toward that line of thinking. However, the stats are the stats. He could very well be someone who bucks the trend. He seems to possess some of those subjective things that would make that a possibility. I have a better chance selecting someone else. I just think hes bound to go to an NFL situation that puts him in a WR2 or slot role, limiting his fantasy upside; he doesn't profile as an NFL WR1 to me. And it's okay to disagree

Hey not bashing your process or anything here, but can you define bust here again? Was it no top 24 PPR finish at all? Or just 1 season with top 24? Also, would you mind sharing the 18% in that field that are not busts? Do some of those 82% have a solid shot at becoming non-busts? Thanks!

The problem with the whole "top 24" parameter is it doesn't mean anything. The idea in theory is related to Wr1/Wr2 identification. Problem is, that's not how this game works.

Just look at last year. Michael Thomas scored 374 ppr points. The 2nd highest scorer was Godwin at 276. The 12th place finisher was Jarvis Landry at 237. So the difference between 1 and 2 was 98 points, and the difference between 2 and 12 was 39. But they were all WR1s?

Lockett was the 13th highest score at 235 and Michael Gallup was 24th at 212. That's a split of 23 points. If you extend the threshold by another 23 points, or a mere 1.43 points per game, you get another 8 WRs included. Does it really matter if you owned the 24th guy or the 32nd guy in that case? What mattered to your team was WHEN they scored their points, because statistically they were basically the same. Some names in that additional 8: Crowder, Ridley, Samuel, Marvin Jones, Metcalf, McLaurin, Emmanuel Sanders <<<--- can't say for sure but I believe all of these guys missed the arbitrary cutoffs of this study.

Bottom line, there's not 12 WR1s, 12 WR2s, 12 WR3s every year, which is the predicate of this spreadsheet. To have any sort of real meaning to the game we play, it needs to have some root in standard deviation. By the same token, a player who falls a 1% sort on BA or DR suffers from the same dogma.

This is why at the end of the day, it's important to consider all factors. Yes, look at DR and BA. Good players usually do well in those categories. Yes, look at draft capital. Yes, consider the combine. Also, watch the player. Think about where they got drafted and how they fit. Consider year 1 impact vs long term play. Search for information on intangibles. Are they unique, 1 of 1 kind of guys like Michael Thomas and Tyreek Hill? Figure out if they're overvalued or undervalued by the fantasy community. Make trades to maximize your understanding of prospects vs the field and take advantage of market inefficiencies wherever possible. It's a whole lot more fun this way because you're not a slave to numbers and it's more effective. Because at the very bottom of it all, even if you make a perfect system that takes all of those factors into account and produces a perfect sample over the last 20 years, it has nothing to do with predicting next season. It's nothing more than back testing. If back testing worked, hedge fund managers would never make mistakes and sports gambling wouldn't be legal.

The only downside is you don't get to claim to have a higher hit rate than the NFL draft.

[Jigga94]

That's a very subjective statement, said with absolute certainty as if its objective fact.

Was it impacted? What about the players shared the field with other top prospects in the history of the NCAA? We can't say for certain it was impacted. Typically the best players get the ball the most often.

Does he have a high skill/ability? That seems to be subjective as well- I'm not aware of a better way to objectively measure skill and ability other than what he scores poorly in. It's an honest question. If there is then I'd be interested to see it. 40 yard dash times dont move the needle for me. John Ross was fast too (FTR, before people fly off the handle and accuse me of comparing him to Ross, and then go on to list 20 reasons why they are different, I am not comparing the two. Just pointing out that 40 time doesnt mean much, at least to me).

Objectively, players with poor dominator ratings and breakout age, whom are also selected in the 1st round, since 2010, bust at a rate of 82%. I can admit looking at it purely from an objective perspective doesnt tell the whole story. I'm an objective person, so I'm going to gravitate toward that line of thinking. However, the stats are the stats. He could very well be someone who bucks the trend. He seems to possess some of those subjective things that would make that a possibility. I have a better chance selecting someone else. I just think hes bound to go to an NFL situation that puts him in a WR2 or slot role, limiting his fantasy upside; he doesn't profile as an NFL WR1 to me. And it's okay to disagree

Hey not bashing your process or anything here, but can you define bust here again? Was it no top 24 PPR finish at all? Or just 1 season with top 24? Also, would you mind sharing the 18% in that field that are not busts? Do some of those 82% have a solid shot at becoming non-busts? Thanks!

The problem with the whole "top 24" parameter is it doesn't mean anything. The idea in theory is related to Wr1/Wr2 identification. Problem is, that's not how this game works.

Just look at last year. Michael Thomas scored 374 ppr points. The 2nd highest scorer was Godwin at 276. The 12th place finisher was Jarvis Landry at 237. So the difference between 1 and 2 was 98 points, and the difference between 2 and 12 was 39. But they were all WR1s?

Lockett was the 13th highest score at 235 and Michael Gallup was 24th at 212. That's a split of 23 points. If you extend the threshold by another 23 points, or a mere 1.43 points per game, you get another 8 WRs included. Does it really matter if you owned the 24th guy or the 32nd guy in that case? What mattered to your team was WHEN they scored their points, because statistically they were basically the same. Some names in that additional 8: Crowder, Ridley, Samuel, Marvin Jones, Metcalf, McLaurin, Emmanuel Sanders <<<--- can't say for sure but I believe all of these guys missed the arbitrary cutoffs of this study.

Bottom line, there's not 12 WR1s, 12 WR2s, 12 WR3s every year, which is the predicate of this spreadsheet. To have any sort of real meaning to the game we play, it needs to have some root in standard deviation. By the same token, a player who falls a 1% sort on BA or DR suffers from the same dogma.

This is why at the end of the day, it's important to consider all factors. Yes, look at DR and BA. Good players usually do well in those categories. Yes, look at draft capital. Yes, consider the combine. Also, watch the player. Think about where they got drafted and how they fit. Consider year 1 impact vs long term play. Search for information on intangibles. Are they unique, 1 of 1 kind of guys like Michael Thomas and Tyreek Hill? Figure out if they're overvalued or undervalued by the fantasy community. Make trades to maximize your understanding of prospects vs the field and take advantage of market inefficiencies wherever possible. It's a whole lot more fun this way because you're not a slave to numbers and it's more effective. Because at the very bottom of it all, even if you make a perfect system that takes all of those factors into account and produces a perfect sample over the last 20 years, it has nothing to do with predicting next season. It's nothing more than back testing. If back testing worked, hedge fund managers would never make mistakes and sports gambling wouldn't be legal.

The only downside is you don't get to claim to have a higher hit rate than the NFL draft.

I understand all of that completely, which is why I'm asking him for the names. Thanks for the response though

[skinfanjon]

Hey OP- that was a great post. Need to look more closely at him. He kinda seems like a turbo charged Darius Slayton, which I like Slayton so that's meant as a compliment. Does that sound like a reasonable comp?

The production stuff doesnt bother me at all. Just looking at the tape, he seems like a really straight line athlete. Not a lot of wiggle or lateral agility but obviously has incredible top end speed. I dont see the my ball mentality or alpha persona...dont see Josh Doctson either but something in the middle. Got any thoughts on that?

[skinfanjon]

I understand all of that completely, which is why I'm asking him for the names. Thanks for the response though

Sorry, that was mostly rhetorical lol.

[Johnny B. Goode]

What % of players with his level of skill and ability bust?
His dominator and breakout age are obviously impacted by the talent he shared the field with.

That's a very subjective statement, said with absolute certainty as if its objective fact.

Was it impacted? What about the players shared the field with other top prospects in the history of the NCAA? We can't say for certain it was impacted. Typically the best players get the ball the most often.

Does he have a high skill/ability? That seems to be subjective as well- I'm not aware of a better way to objectively measure skill and ability other than what he scores poorly in. It's an honest question. If there is then I'd be interested to see it. 40 yard dash times dont move the needle for me. John Ross was fast too (FTR, before people fly off the handle and accuse me of comparing him to Ross, and then go on to list 20 reasons why they are different, I am not comparing the two. Just pointing out that 40 time doesnt mean much, at least to me).

Objectively, players with poor dominator ratings and breakout age, whom are also selected in the 1st round, since 2010, bust at a rate of 82%. I can admit looking at it purely from an objective perspective doesnt tell the whole story. I'm an objective person, so I'm going to gravitate toward that line of thinking. However, the stats are the stats. He could very well be someone who bucks the trend. He seems to possess some of those subjective things that would make that a possibility. I have a better chance selecting someone else. I just think hes bound to go to an NFL situation that puts him in a WR2 or slot role, limiting his fantasy upside; he doesn't profile as an NFL WR1 to me. And it's okay to disagree

Hey not bashing your process or anything here, but can you define bust here again? Was it no top 24 PPR finish at all? Or just 1 season with top 24? Also, would you mind sharing the 18% in that field that are not busts? Do some of those 82% have a solid shot at becoming non-busts? Thanks!

yes, zero top 24 finishes

There are 11 WRs in the last 10 years drafted in the 1st round who had a poor dominator rating and/or breakout age. 2 of those had a top 24 season: Calvin Ridley and Kelvin Benjamin. Neither of them, to date, have had a WR1 season. So its safe to say zero 1st round WRs since 2010 have had a WR1 season and missed on Dominator Rating and/or Breakout Age. Also, both of them only missed on Breakout age. Ruggs misses on both. He would certainly be an anomaly, and the first at least as far back as my data goes (2010).

The good news is his athletic profile is similar to the ONLY drafted WR since 2010 to miss on both Dominator and Breakout age and have at least 1 top 24 season. And that guy is pretty darn impressive. "So you're sayin' theres a chance!"

It's over simplification, and I've already highlighted that analytics dont give the full story, but there are many wrs in his same situation who did not pan out. Last year it was Campbell whom everyone was drooling over. This year it's Ruggs. The analytics may be wrong, but I'll leave it to someone else to take that chance. I dont blame anyone for taking him... his ceiling is pretty big if he hits, I totally get it. I'm somewhat conservative when it comes to picking players... I'd rather take the double than swing for the grand slam.

IMO landing spot matters more for him than any other WR. Those that were projected busts (all, not just 1st rounders), but actually hit were guys who landed in very ideal situations.

To answer your last question:
Marquise Brown
Mike Williams
Corey Coleman
Laquon Treadwell
Kevin White
Tavon Austin
Cordarrelle Patterson
Justin Blackmon
AJ Jenkins

[Ice]

Hey OP- that was a great post. Need to look more closely at him. He kinda seems like a turbo charged Darius Slayton, which I like Slayton so that's meant as a compliment. Does that sound like a reasonable comp?

The production stuff doesnt bother me at all. Just looking at the tape, he seems like a really straight line athlete. Not a lot of wiggle or lateral agility but obviously has incredible top end speed. I dont see the my ball mentality or alpha persona...dont see Josh Doctson either but something in the middle. Got any thoughts on that?

Not a bad comp but Ruggs is way more advanced in ability to track the ball and Ruggs hands are vastly better. I do like Slayton pretty well myself.

Ruggs is not close to a straight line athlete. He is a far more advanced route runner than many realize. His tape doesn't lie. His lateral agility is elite, its just that he is so in control of his body it is very subtle.

The fact he shows up in really big games shows his alpha persona as you say.

The reality that he had 1 dropped pass in college should cover any "MY Ball" misgivings.

I would say his receiving skill set is far more advanced than Tyreek Hill's coming into the draft. Of course Hill was a RB in college. I would recommend watching Hill's 2018 - 2019 KC highlights and compare those routes and catches to Ruggs Highlights.

Think you will be surprised at the similarities. Ruggs is actually smoother out of his breaks and many scouts have to be drooling like a few coordinators thinking of ways to utilize his blazing speed.