Making the Case

There are essentially 5 DIFFERENT FACTORS you can use to rank WR prospects.

No matter what someone’s process is, the criteria used to determine their WR rankings is going to consist of 1 of, or a collection of:

– College Production
– Draft Capital
– Early-Declare Status
– Film Grade
– Athleticism

Some of these categories can be broken down into sub-categories:

– College Production (breakout age, target-share, yardage-share; efficiency metrics like YPRR, TPRR, RYPTA; final season production; teammate & conference adjustments; & more)

– Film Grade (NFL.com grade, Reception Perception percentiles, PFF Receiving grade)

– Draft Capital (can also reference a WR’s recruiting grade)

But no matter who you ask…

Every single WR prospecting process is going to be determined by some combination of these factors:

– College Production
– Draft Capital
– Early-Declare Status
– Film Grade
– Athleticism

Those are the only factors we have.

& this is essentially the same for every single position (QB, RB, WR, TE).

We only have so much available data (college production, draft capital, early-declare status, athleticism), & the rest (film grade) is subjective.

Some people rely on just just 1 or 2 of these factors, but I prefer to weigh EVERY FACTOR.

My approach to WR prospecting (& prospecting in general) has always been a “holistic” approach.

The goal is to COLLECT AS MUCH DATA AS POSSIBLE & not to leave any “angles” uncovered.

& I don’t intend to change in that regard.

BUT, I do feel as if I’ve was “overweighting” specific factors in the past.

To give you guys some background, I had A LOT of success early-on drafting BIG, FAST, STRONG WR’s (specifically AJ Brown & DK Metcalf). I was ALL-IN on both of these “Alpha” types heading into their second season, & even wrote a full “Case for DK Metcalf.”

They both went berserk in YR2 & it really “cemented” that approach of targeting big, fast, strong “Alpha” WR’s for me.

But lemme tell ya, after drafting Terrace Marshall, & Treylon Burks, & Quentin Johnston…

I’ve been forced to re-evaluate.

Specifically – why did I have Treylon Burks over Chris Olave in 2022 & Quentin Johnston over Zay Flowers in 2023 (two decisions which have proven to be WRONG)?

For starters, I didn’t want to rank Olave over Burks or Zay over Johnston because I had a tough time drafting a RD1 late-declare WR over a RD1 early-declare WR.

There had been 40 WR’s drafted RD1 from 2010-2020.

26 early-declares, 14 late-declares.

16/26 early-declare WR’s (61.5%) had put up a 1,000 yard season.

While only 5/14 late-declares (35.7%) had put up a 1,000 yard season.

The data just strongly preferred early-declares over late-declares.

Especially considering the RD1 early-declares (Burks & Johnston) had quality college production profiles (& in Burks’ case, a fantastic one).

I just didn’t want to rank productive late-declares (Olave & Zay) over productive early-declares (Burks & Johnston).

But considering the more recent success of RD1 late-declares (Brandon Aiyuk, Devonta Smith, Chris Olave, Zay Flowers in 4-consecutive classes)…

I need to shift that stance (at least somewhat).

Looking back, Olave & Zay Flowers BOTH had “quality” production profiles (they hit the thresholds in breakout age, market-shares, YPRR, PFF grade).

Olave (11th overall) was also drafted higher in the NFL Draft than Burks (18th overall).

Most importantly, Olave & Flowers had CLEAN Reception Perception profiles (film grades).

Burks & Johnston didn’t.

Olave charted out with 90th, 80th, & 93rd percentile success-rates vs Man, Zone, & Press in his rookie prospect profile.

Flowers charted out with 74th, 59th, & 79th percentile success-rates vs Man, Zone, & Press in his rookie prospect profile.

While Burks charted out with 11th, 69th, & 42nd percentile success-rates vs Man, Zone, & Press in his rookie prospect profile.

& Johnston charted out with 85th, 12th, & 59th percentile success-rates vs Man, Zone, & Press in his rookie prospect profile.

Olave & Flowers were above 59% in every category & above 74% in 2 out of 3 categories. No red flags.

Meanwhile Burks & Johnston were below 15% in 1 category – a major red flag.

At the time, I figured Burks just won in other ways than route-running (as a YAC & contested-threat, some of these type do exist, such as Deebo Samuel, & Rashee Rice).

& I figured Johnston’s poor success-rate vs Zone (12th percentile) “didn’t matter” if he dominated vs Man (85th percentile).

I also saw what I perceived to be a “similar” blemish in Jordan Addison’s rookie prospect profile, as Addison charted with just a 17th percentile success-rate vs Press (68th & 58th percentile vs Man & Zone).

But looking back, it’s pretty obvious that Johnston’s “blemish” vs Zone was more concerning than Addison’s “blemish” vs Press.

& it’s becomes even more clear to me that I was misinterpreting the Reception Perception charts in that way.

Johnston was charted as running 50% of his routes vs Zone & having only a 12% success-rate on those routes.

While Addison was charted as running just 21.8% of his routes vs Press & having only a 17% success-rate on those routes.

A player struggling on 50% of his sample is much more concerning than a player struggling on 21.8% of his sample.

DUH! Stupid me.

It’s quite clear that players face Zone much more than they face Press & I’m an dolt for thinking of the two “blemishes” similarly.

Lesson learned!

Reception Perception percentiles vs Man & Zone are much more important than percentiles vs Press.

& the Reception Perception percentiles clearly do matter, & I need to put them ahead of early-declare status.

Early-declare status should only be used as a tie-breaker between similarly-productive, similarly-drafted WR’s with similar Reception Perception percentiles. That’s it.

We’re NOT putting early-declare status before similarly productive, similarly drafted WR’s with differing Reception Perception profiles anymore.

Freedom!

We’re putting college production, draft capital, & film grade (Reception Perception percentiles) first going forward. & we’re only using early-declare status as a tiebreaker between players who are equal in those first 3 categories.

Whereas my weighting before was probably:

– College Production
– Draft Capital
– Early-Declare Status  
– Athleticism
– Film Grade (Reception Perception percentiles)

It’s clear I need to move early-declare status & athleticism down.

Going forward, the weighting in our rookie WR rankings is going to be:

– College Production
– Draft Capital
– Film Grade (Reception Perception percentiles)
– Early-Declare Status
– Athleticism

We will be pushing down players who have red flags in their film grades (Reception Perception profiles) & we will be boosting the ones who are “clean” in that regard.

This shift would’ve had us drafting Garrett Wilson as our WR1 & Olave > Burks in 2022.

& it would’ve had us drafting Addison > Zay > Johnston in 2023.

I will obviously be looking to document this shift moving forward & am open to new data, but with the data we currently have in hand, I am confident this is the correct shift moving forward.