Rookie WR Production 2023

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Addison played in 17 games so the list isn’t applicable.

I did think about it some more on the drive home, and I think late-1st was a bit harsh. I would lean somewhere between mid and late. Would probably not do 1.05/1.06 but also not do late as in 1.12. Somewhere inbetween.

Even if you account for just the 17-game era:

- Amon-Ra St. Brown
- Ja'Marr Chase
- Jaylen Waddle
- Garrett Wilson
- Chris Olave

It's a smaller sample, but it's still continuing off the type of quality that the 16-game sample has.

To each his own, but I don't see Addison as a concerning prospect at all. He's been a stud since his freshman year of college and is still a stud in the NFL. I think there's a lot to suggest that his OS will improve going forward, which of course isn't unheard of.

So I’m just curious, if Addison is a stud then who are you picking to bust. They can’t all be good, or at least it’s not likely.

Open Score
ARSB 58
Olave 82
Wilson 77
Chase 61
Waddle 50
Addison 44

Pff Grade
Addison 69
Olave 82
Wilson 85
Waddle 78
Chase 84
ARSB 80


Addison metrics are [edit] the lowest of the group, open score and pff grade.

I’m not saying Addison will bust, but he’s got the bust indicators that the other players don’t. Or, instead of using the term bust, is other metrics aren’t nearly as strong as the other wrs you are grouping him with.

I don’t dislike Addison, I’m just doing my best to interpret the data and therefor I’d have him the lowest of the 47+ group. I don’t see how this is a hot take of any kind.

I also don’t agree with lumping 900+ yards receivers in with the 1000+ yard receivers .

[Bronco Billy]

Glad I held onto my Kraft shares.

Drafted them both in my main league… the problem
Is that they’ll cannibalize each other. I wish they were on different teams because they’d both be starters… instead we get both of them next year at 65% of what they could be.

I’ve tried several times to try to tell people that they don’t play the same position. In-line TEs (Kraft) and Move TEs (Musgrave) are as similar in scheming as Wide Outs and Slot receivers.

[Sriracha]

Addison played in 17 games so the list isn’t applicable.

I did think about it some more on the drive home, and I think late-1st was a bit harsh. I would lean somewhere between mid and late. Would probably not do 1.05/1.06 but also not do late as in 1.12. Somewhere inbetween.

Even if you account for just the 17-game era:

- Amon-Ra St. Brown
- Ja'Marr Chase
- Jaylen Waddle
- Garrett Wilson
- Chris Olave

It's a smaller sample, but it's still continuing off the type of quality that the 16-game sample has.

To each his own, but I don't see Addison as a concerning prospect at all. He's been a stud since his freshman year of college and is still a stud in the NFL. I think there's a lot to suggest that his OS will improve going forward, which of course isn't unheard of.

So I’m just curious, if Addison is a stud then who are you picking to bust. They can’t all be good, or at least it’s not likely.

Open Score
ARSB 58
Olave 82
Wilson 77
Chase 61
Waddle 50
Addison 44

Pff Grade
Addison 69
Olave 82
Wilson 85
Waddle 78
Chase 84
ARSB 80


Addison metrics are [edit] the lowest of the group, open score and pff grade.

I’m not saying Addison will bust, but he’s got the bust indicators that the other players don’t. Or, instead of using the term bust, is other metrics aren’t nearly as strong as the other wrs you are grouping him with.

I don’t dislike Addison, I’m just doing my best to interpret the data and therefor I’d have him the lowest of the 47+ group. I don’t see how this is a hot take of any kind.

I also don’t agree with lumping 900+ yards receivers in with the 1000+ yard receivers .

Assuming one of these guys *has* to bust is a logical fallacy.

None of their play is based on how well the others do.

The top 5 QBs in 2020’s class have all hit, for example

[Cameron Giles]

Addison played in 17 games so the list isn’t applicable.

I did think about it some more on the drive home, and I think late-1st was a bit harsh. I would lean somewhere between mid and late. Would probably not do 1.05/1.06 but also not do late as in 1.12. Somewhere inbetween.

Even if you account for just the 17-game era:

- Amon-Ra St. Brown
- Ja'Marr Chase
- Jaylen Waddle
- Garrett Wilson
- Chris Olave

It's a smaller sample, but it's still continuing off the type of quality that the 16-game sample has.

To each his own, but I don't see Addison as a concerning prospect at all. He's been a stud since his freshman year of college and is still a stud in the NFL. I think there's a lot to suggest that his OS will improve going forward, which of course isn't unheard of.

So I’m just curious, if Addison is a stud then who are you picking to bust. They can’t all be good, or at least it’s not likely.

Open Score
ARSB 58
Olave 82
Wilson 77
Chase 61
Waddle 50
Addison 44

Pff Grade
Addison 69
Olave 82
Wilson 85
Waddle 78
Chase 84
ARSB 80


Addison metrics are [edit] the lowest of the group, open score and pff grade.

I’m not saying Addison will bust, but he’s got the bust indicators that the other players don’t. Or, instead of using the term bust, is other metrics aren’t nearly as strong as the other wrs you are grouping him with.

I don’t dislike Addison, I’m just doing my best to interpret the data and therefor I’d have him the lowest of the 47+ group. I don’t see how this is a hot take of any kind.

I also don’t agree with lumping 900+ yards receivers in with the 1000+ yard receivers .

I'm not saying it's a hot take. I just don't see what you gain by moving Addison for a late 1st in any format. Whether it's a 16 or 17 game sample, only 19 other WRs have produced at his level in the last 23 years. You're unlikely to draft a rookie WR who produces a similar statline, so you're already signing up for an uphill climb to recouping similar value.

I don't have a pick to bust. I do think Addison will see some touchdown regression, but I like his chances for improving on Open Score and PFF grade. You look at someone like Aiyuk for example. His OS as a rookie and sophomore was 53 and 51. He made a 30 point jump in his 3rd year. Everyone wrote off George Pickens in the offseason, and he made a 20-point jump, increasing his OS from 48 to 68.

I get we're trying to project, but sometimes I think we look at these numbers too hard in a vacuum without considering that improvement does happen. Addison looks like the type of player I'd bet on improvement happening with.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Even if you account for just the 17-game era:

- Amon-Ra St. Brown
- Ja'Marr Chase
- Jaylen Waddle
- Garrett Wilson
- Chris Olave

It's a smaller sample, but it's still continuing off the type of quality that the 16-game sample has.

To each his own, but I don't see Addison as a concerning prospect at all. He's been a stud since his freshman year of college and is still a stud in the NFL. I think there's a lot to suggest that his OS will improve going forward, which of course isn't unheard of.

So I’m just curious, if Addison is a stud then who are you picking to bust. They can’t all be good, or at least it’s not likely.

Open Score
ARSB 58
Olave 82
Wilson 77
Chase 61
Waddle 50
Addison 44

Pff Grade
Addison 69
Olave 82
Wilson 85
Waddle 78
Chase 84
ARSB 80


Addison metrics are [edit] the lowest of the group, open score and pff grade.

I’m not saying Addison will bust, but he’s got the bust indicators that the other players don’t. Or, instead of using the term bust, is other metrics aren’t nearly as strong as the other wrs you are grouping him with.

I don’t dislike Addison, I’m just doing my best to interpret the data and therefor I’d have him the lowest of the 47+ group. I don’t see how this is a hot take of any kind.

I also don’t agree with lumping 900+ yards receivers in with the 1000+ yard receivers .

I'm not saying it's a hot take. I just don't see what you gain by moving Addison for a late 1st in any format. Whether it's a 16 or 17 game sample, only 19 other WRs have produced at his level in the last 23 years. You're unlikely to draft a rookie WR who produces a similar statline, so you're already signing up for an uphill climb to recouping similar value.

I don't have a pick to bust. I do think Addison will see some touchdown regression, but I like his chances for improving on Open Score and PFF grade. You look at someone like Aiyuk for example. His OS as a rookie and sophomore was 53 and 51. He made a 30 point jump in his 3rd year. Everyone wrote off George Pickens in the offseason, and he made a 20-point jump, increasing his OS from 48 to 68.

I get we're trying to project, but sometimes I think we look at these numbers too hard in a vacuum without considering that improvement does happen. Addison looks like the type of player I'd bet on improvement happening with.

Yeah, I get it. As I said before, late-1st may have been a bit harsh. But I’d still value him lower than the other players in his tier.

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Even if you account for just the 17-game era:

- Amon-Ra St. Brown
- Ja'Marr Chase
- Jaylen Waddle
- Garrett Wilson
- Chris Olave

It's a smaller sample, but it's still continuing off the type of quality that the 16-game sample has.

To each his own, but I don't see Addison as a concerning prospect at all. He's been a stud since his freshman year of college and is still a stud in the NFL. I think there's a lot to suggest that his OS will improve going forward, which of course isn't unheard of.

So I’m just curious, if Addison is a stud then who are you picking to bust. They can’t all be good, or at least it’s not likely.

Open Score
ARSB 58
Olave 82
Wilson 77
Chase 61
Waddle 50
Addison 44

Pff Grade
Addison 69
Olave 82
Wilson 85
Waddle 78
Chase 84
ARSB 80


Addison metrics are [edit] the lowest of the group, open score and pff grade.

I’m not saying Addison will bust, but he’s got the bust indicators that the other players don’t. Or, instead of using the term bust, is other metrics aren’t nearly as strong as the other wrs you are grouping him with.

I don’t dislike Addison, I’m just doing my best to interpret the data and therefor I’d have him the lowest of the 47+ group. I don’t see how this is a hot take of any kind.

I also don’t agree with lumping 900+ yards receivers in with the 1000+ yard receivers .

Assuming one of these guys *has* to bust is a logical fallacy.

None of their play is based on how well the others do.

The top 5 QBs in 2020’s class have all hit, for example

Right, I’m not an idiot. That’s why I said “it’s not likely” that theyre all good. Of course they could be. But usually they are not. I’m simply saying, if one were to bust, which one would it be.

It’s exhausting jumping through these ridiculous hoops when 99% of ppl understand what I’m talking about. Trying to type on my phone while I’m cooking dinner, every post doesn’t need to be a peer reviewed scientific thesis.

Assuming 70% probability of being good or better for each receiever between 47-66 ypg, I believe the probability of all 5 players being good or better is like 17%. So yeah, not likely. And in all honestly, just being “good” isn’t really that alluring for fantasy. The odds of them all being studs (which is what we REALLY want), which for any given player (in that group) is around 42% if we average the two groups together, and the probability all 5 turn into studs is like 1%. Not likely.

[Anteaters]

Assuming 70% probability of being good or better for each receiever between 47-66 ypg, I believe the probability of all 5 players being good or better is like 17%. So yeah, not likely. And in all honestly, just being “good” isn’t really that alluring for fantasy. The odds of them all being studs (which is what we REALLY want), which for any given player (in that group) is around 42% if we average the two groups together, and the probability all 5 turn into studs is like 1%. Not likely.

Sounds like Coin Flips talk to me. Stop that!

(good stuff)

[Dynasty DeLorean]

Assuming 70% probability of being good or better for each receiever between 47-66 ypg, I believe the probability of all 5 players being good or better is like 17%. So yeah, not likely. And in all honestly, just being “good” isn’t really that alluring for fantasy. The odds of them all being studs (which is what we REALLY want), which for any given player (in that group) is around 42% if we average the two groups together, and the probability all 5 turn into studs is like 1%. Not likely.

Sounds like Coin Flips talk to me. Stop that!

(good stuff)

Fine, I will stop that. Because I take everything I read literally and have no agency to do otherwise.

And for the record, I wasn’t talking about coin flips. That’s a common logical fallacy that whenever someone is discussing probabilities they’re speaking of coin flips.

I just flipped a coin yesterday, for example. It was heads.

[Sriracha]

So I’m just curious, if Addison is a stud then who are you picking to bust. They can’t all be good, or at least it’s not likely.

Open Score
ARSB 58
Olave 82
Wilson 77
Chase 61
Waddle 50
Addison 44

Pff Grade
Addison 69
Olave 82
Wilson 85
Waddle 78
Chase 84
ARSB 80


Addison metrics are [edit] the lowest of the group, open score and pff grade.

I’m not saying Addison will bust, but he’s got the bust indicators that the other players don’t. Or, instead of using the term bust, is other metrics aren’t nearly as strong as the other wrs you are grouping him with.

I don’t dislike Addison, I’m just doing my best to interpret the data and therefor I’d have him the lowest of the 47+ group. I don’t see how this is a hot take of any kind.

I also don’t agree with lumping 900+ yards receivers in with the 1000+ yard receivers .

Assuming one of these guys *has* to bust is a logical fallacy.

None of their play is based on how well the others do.

The top 5 QBs in 2020’s class have all hit, for example

Right, I’m not an idiot. That’s why I said “it’s not likely” that theyre all good. Of course they could be. But usually they are not. I’m simply saying, if one were to bust, which one would it be.

It’s exhausting jumping through these ridiculous hoops when 99% of ppl understand what I’m talking about. Trying to type on my phone while I’m cooking dinner, every post doesn’t need to be a peer reviewed scientific thesis.

Assuming 70% probability of being good or better for each receiever between 47-66 ypg, I believe the probability of all 5 players being good or better is like 17%. So yeah, not likely. And in all honestly, just being “good” isn’t really that alluring for fantasy. The odds of them all being studs (which is what we REALLY want), which for any given player (in that group) is around 42% if we average the two groups together, and the probability all 5 turn into studs is like 1%. Not likely.

Sure, but if you correctly admit that all of them could hit; and in your process he's lumped in the same range of the other WRs.. why are you trying to sift through your own thresholds in an attempt to "spot the bust"?

The whole point of analytics is admitting that you don't know the answer here and that there is a range of outcomes for each of the WRs that fit the thresholds you're measuring them against.

All of them could bust. All of them could hit. Based on historical precedence we like their odds. Just gotta make the decision based on what you're comfortable with. For you, that's moving Addison lower than the rest of the people in his tier of rookie production which is completely ok, but it's just a preference.

[Shoreline Steamers]

I think DD does some great work, and I appreciate his contributions to the forum as I assume most of the posters in this thread do as well. Right now it's reckoning season, when the numbers need to be evaluated, and we make our decisions as to what we do with all the players we drafted or added in 2023.

There's going to be people passionately arguing one way or the other about players. Why player "x" is an exception to the thresholds, and what value we can expect moving forward. Buy, hold, or sell?

I guess I don't see the need for this to devolve into an argument about every WR who didn't hit this or that metric. If you're a believer, cool! Enjoy the ride and hope for the best. I think the point of this thread year over year is to try and find some sort of baseline(s) to use as a data point to discover WR's that historically have enjoyed success, or sadly, failed to do so.

No model is 100% accurate, and DD is pretty forthcoming about that, not claiming his to be so. It's frankly a harsh cut that excludes players many of us were high on at one point or another. You obviously don't have to buy in, or accept his thresholds. But I do appreciate the effort to aid in identifying players who just might not be what we'd hoped so we can get out sooner than later if that's what we choose.

The last thing I'd want to do is shoot the messenger if he's telling me something I don't want to hear. Not pointing fingers or accusing anyone of doing this. But in general, people don't like opinions that don't coincide with their own. I look at this thread and DD's work as a PSA. It's meant to be of assistance, but nobody is forcing you to listen.

Guess I'd just like to say thanks for working on this over the last several years, and I appreciate your efforts. It's a solid contribution to the DLF community. Hell, I've been here since 2012 and haven't contributed half as much!

[TheTroll]

I think DD does some great work, and I appreciate his contributions to the forum as I assume most of the posters in this thread do as well. Right now it's reckoning season, when the numbers need to be evaluated, and we make our decisions as to what we do with all the players we drafted or added in 2023.

There's going to be people passionately arguing one way or the other about players. Why player "x" is an exception to the thresholds, and what value we can expect moving forward. Buy, hold, or sell?

I guess I don't see the need for this to devolve into an argument about every WR who didn't hit this or that metric. If you're a believer, cool! Enjoy the ride and hope for the best. I think the point of this thread year over year is to try and find some sort of baseline(s) to use as a data point to discover WR's that historically have enjoyed success, or sadly, failed to do so.

No model is 100% accurate, and DD is pretty forthcoming about that, not claiming his to be so. It's frankly a harsh cut that excludes players many of us were high on at one point or another. You obviously don't have to buy in, or accept his thresholds. But I do appreciate the effort to aid in identifying players who just might not be what we'd hoped so we can get out sooner than later if that's what we choose.

The last thing I'd want to do is shoot the messenger if he's telling me something I don't want to hear. Not pointing fingers or accusing anyone of doing this. But in general, people don't like opinions that don't coincide with their own. I look at this thread and DD's work as a PSA. It's meant to be of assistance, but nobody is forcing you to listen.

Guess I'd just like to say thanks for working on this over the last several years, and I appreciate your efforts. It's a solid contribution to the DLF community. Hell, I've been here since 2012 and haven't contributed half as much!

Well said! Thx DD

[trc]

DD - I really appreciate what you have been doing all through the season (and prior seasons), absolutely top class!


I can't recall if you have been investigating if target share in a rookie season has any correlation to future success?
My thought is that if a rookie has a high target share, then that rookie is trusted by the team and most likely will continue to get opportunities/targets in future as well.
Reason I ask is that someone a few pages back compared JSN to Lamb in terms of what they accomplished as a rookie and I did a napkin calculation that both of them had a 18% target share in their rookie season. I'm in now way saying JSN=Lamb, just got me curious.

Full year target share for other rookies this year:
Flowers 22% (team leader)
Reed 17 % (team leader with Doubs)
Wicks 10%
Douglas 14 % (team leader)
Puka 29 % (team leader)
Dell 13 % (quite high with only 11 games played)
Rice 17%
Downs 18 %

[trc]

Just did a quick on the active top xx active players.
Initially it seems like ideally a target share as a rookie should be above 20%.
Some didn't exceed that threshold, but still got success:
Aiyuk (17 %), Davanta Adams (12 %), Lamb (18 %), Diggs (19 %), Kupp (18 %)

The players above 20%
Chase, JJ, Garrett Wilson, Amon-Ra, Olave Waddle, DeVonta Smith, AJ Brown, DK, Evans, London.

Perhaps the 20% threshold is to high.. 18 % could be the sweet spot.

I'm fully aware, that I haven't done the opposite research of who exceeded the 20 % (or 18 %) in their rookie seasons and still ended up busting.

[Anteaters]

I think DD does some great work, and I appreciate his contributions to the forum

++

[Jigga94]

The issue I have with Downs is he put this up with Minshew at QB and things will probably be much worse for him in the near future with AR as his QB

I thought he had good splits with AR too? I know it was early on in his rookie year too though