Picking Value Receivers (Non-rookies)
Guest Submission posted 8/28 by Steve Haynes, Exclusive to Footballguys.com

Important for all Teams
It is a difficult challenge to assemble a redraft roster that features strong consistent wide receivers, primarily because the week to week WR scoring for even premier players varies wildly. Consider the non-PPR WR scoring ranges from last season in the table below. Even if you focused on WRs early and were able to draft Chad Johnson, Holt, and Driver for your team (three top ten 06 WRs), in a start 3 WR league, you still would have had to endure 29 WR single digit scores. A remarkable 60.4% of their fantasy scores were less than ten points. The absolute best double digit trio out of last year's top ten would have combined Terrell Owens with two of Harrison, Steve Smith, and Walker. Either of those trios scored double digits 28 times or 58.3% of the time.
|
'06 Rank
|
Wide Receiver |
Weekly Points Scored
|
|||
|
0 to 4.9
|
5 to 9.9
|
10 to 14.9
|
15+
|
||
|
1
|
Marvin Harrison |
3
|
4
|
4
|
5
|
|
2
|
Terrell Owens |
2
|
4
|
4
|
6
|
|
3
|
Reggie Wayne |
1
|
7
|
5
|
3
|
|
4
|
Chad Johnson |
5
|
5
|
4
|
2
|
|
5
|
Torry Holt |
3
|
7
|
1
|
5
|
|
6
|
Donald Driver |
4
|
5
|
2
|
5
|
|
7
|
Lee Evans |
4
|
4
|
4
|
4
|
|
8
|
Steve Smith |
1
|
4
|
6
|
3
|
|
9
|
Javon Walker |
3
|
4
|
7
|
2
|
|
10
|
Roy Williams |
4
|
5
|
3
|
4
|
You don't often have rosters with early round WRs of that caliber because the overwhelming majority of fantasy footballers concentrate on Running Backs first, grabbing two or even three before looking at other positions. This is reasonable strategy because the number of top line RBs is significantly less than WRs. Occasionally some drafters even venture into the land of the Stud Quarterback or decide to lock in one of their top five Tight End candidates prior to selecting their first WR. Acquiring Gates and Manning or Palmer after the selection of a top five candidate RB can be an excellent strategy, but its success is dependent on the drafter's ability to successfully choose lower round WRs that will out-produce their Average Draft Position (ADP). This study will provide some guidance in the art of predicting who those value lower round WRs will be this year. Regardless of your initial drafting strategy, everyone needs late round bargains. They are excellent trade bait, if nothing else, so read on to possibly find some helpful hints on locating WR value.
WR 40 and Below
My focus for this article has been on non-rookie WRs that are expected to be drafted at or below the WR 40 plateau. Several of my evaluation categories did not accommodate rookie calculations, so those players were omitted from this study. The WRs we will assess should typically be available in the tenth round and later of twelve team leagues. You certainly can find over performers even earlier in your draft, but identifying the later round bargain WRs is the purpose of this article.
In preparing the study, I researched data from 02 through 06 to identify common traits for the later round WRs that outperformed their ADP. Several value WRs were identified and the majority had several key indicators in common.
Common Traits of Over-performers
I considered the most important trait was one that was discovered quickly. A player that had performed very well and had an injury in year x almost always had a much lower ADP than his previous production level in year x+1. Many guys that had finished in the 20s or 30s two years or more would drop down the ADP listing to the WR 40s level the next season after their injury. This circumstance definitely produced significant opportunities for a later round value selection.
Opportunity is another key factor. Identifying teams that have lost key WR options (Seattle, Carolina, and Oakland this year), therefore increasing the opportunity for the guys that have previously been the second or third option. Look closely at the depth charts just prior to your draft so that you can increase the certainty of locking into the correct recipient of the gained opportunity. This is even more important when the second or third option guy moving up on the depth chart missed games the previous season.
More of the identified value receivers were on teams with dominant passing attacks. Writing this down almost seems a waste of time, but there are WR candidates almost every year with lower ADPs on teams with perennial high powered passing attacks. Guys from these teams produce even greater value when they do come through. I guess its a case of overlooking the obvious. You should also look at the team's previous year WRs stats. Some teams with huge passing yardage distribute a greater share to the RBs and/or TEs and the WRs wind up with fewer opportunities than you would expect.
Another common trait was steady, if not spectacular year to year improvement in the WR statistics. There were significantly more identified value play WRs that exhibited some improvement in seasons leading up to their value season. The study confirmed that even NFL first round WRs normally have a season or two with limited, but improving success before they jumped up in the WR rankings.
The last, but certainly not least important factor is talent. Skilled guys will get more chances. I default to the NFL scouts on their assessment of talent and used the round that the player was drafted to gauge his talent. I know that there are many examples where later round guys have similar skills and were overlooked in the draft, but generally speaking the first and second round guys will be given more opportunities to succeed than the later round selections or undrafted free agents.
Determining an Evaluation Formula
I determined that I needed a more quantifiable evaluation so I developed eight evaluation categories to rank the Value WR candidates. These categories were generally set up to quantify the paragraphs described above in the common trait section. They are listed below to describe the various formulas associated with the categories and for easier identification in the attached excel file and the ranking chart to follow:
- Comparing 06 Performance to 07 ADP (22.2 points) - Individual players' 06 fantasy points were compared to the expected 07 points for his 07 ADP. The resulting sums were then compared to the category's maximum performer and adjusted to a maximum 22.2 pts
- Depth Charts (14.8 points) - WR1 received 14.8, WR2 got 10, WR3 scored 5, and so on. Allowances were made for positions with doubt as to which position was correct. The depth charts should be watched closely during preseason workouts and updated.
- Team 06 Passing Stats and 07 Projections (11.1 points) - Simply added the yardage stats from 06 and the FBG projections for 07 and then compare to the category top scorer and adjust those rankings to a 11.1 maximum
- WR 06 Reception Stats and 07 Projections (11.1 points) - Distributed points similar to the team passing category described in item three
- Increased Opportunities (11.1 points) - Combine games missed by the individual player in the previous year with top WR departures clearing the way for more opportunity in 07
- Previous season's number of top 48 Ranking (11.1 points) - The previous three years were reviewed to see how many times the player ranked in the top 48 of all WRs. Divided that number by three and multiplied by 11.1 for the category score.
- Improving Stats (11.1 points) - Reviewed the previous three seasons, up all three years got top score, increase in later years preferred to earlier, & drop got bottom ranking
- Talent, i.e. NFL Round drafted (7.5 points) - Divided 1 by the round drafted and multiplied by 7.5. Undrafted players received a token 0.5 points.
It is important to note that the highest ranked criteria is the comparison of the players' 06 fantasy points to the expected fantasy points for that player's 07 ADP. Some of the lower ADP player's may produce higher evaluation numbers, but the resulting number does not mean that player should be drafted earlier. It just reflects that player's increased likelihood to outperform their ADP. When determining the point to draft your value WRs, you must be guided by their ADP, your league scoring rules, and your fellow owner's drafting tendencies to identify the latest point that your WR value candidates could be drafted.
Another important fact that is almost always overlooked in the evaluation of "sleepers" is that everybody has their own opinion on them. In a recent Footballguys Shark Pool Forum thread, no less than fifty value WRs were suggested by various fantasy players. You should not reach too early for "your" sleeper! The best strategy is to have several sleeper options so that you can wait and still select some value WRs that you like in the latest rounds possible. I hope that this article and the evaluation table that follows assist you to identify a few more possibilities. Remember to let the draft come to you and have a great season.
Some of my favorite Value WR selections are indicated in the table that follows with all bold text.
| Name |
oa adp
|
wr adp
|
06 adp FP
|
2006 FPs
|
diff
|
dpth
|
tm pass
|
wr yds
|
inc opp
|
prv top 48
|
#s imp
|
rnd drf val
|
tot
|
| Henderson |
133
|
40
|
97.7
|
111.9
|
5.7
|
5.0
|
10.79
|
9.10
|
3.7
|
3.7
|
11.1
|
3.75
|
52.79
|
| J Porter |
134
|
41
|
95.7
|
3.9
|
-10.0
|
12.0
|
7.48
|
6.08
|
18.0
|
7.4
|
7.0
|
3.75
|
51.72
|
| D Bennett |
143
|
42
|
92.7
|
91.7
|
-0.4
|
5.0
|
10.74
|
9.49
|
0.0
|
11.1
|
4.0
|
0.50
|
40.44
|
| B Jones |
143
|
43
|
91.9
|
62.7
|
-11.6
|
12.0
|
7.02
|
6.06
|
5.0
|
0.0
|
7.0
|
2.50
|
27.94
|
| J Horn |
143
|
44
|
91.7
|
91.9
|
0.1
|
10.0
|
6.90
|
5.68
|
9.6
|
7.4
|
2.0
|
1.50
|
43.16
|
| I Bruce |
144
|
45
|
89.1
|
127.8
|
15.4
|
10.0
|
10.74
|
9.49
|
0.0
|
7.4
|
3.0
|
3.75
|
59.81
|
| M Furrey |
145
|
46
|
88.9
|
144.6
|
22.2
|
5.0
|
10.20
|
9.71
|
0.0
|
3.7
|
8.0
|
0.50
|
59.31
|
| Muhamad |
149
|
48
|
87.2
|
116.3
|
11.6
|
10.0
|
8.60
|
7.68
|
0.0
|
11.1
|
4.0
|
3.75
|
56.73
|
| R Curry |
154
|
49
|
86.6
|
79.1
|
-3.0
|
10.0
|
7.48
|
6.08
|
4.0
|
3.7
|
2.0
|
1.07
|
31.34
|
| RgWilliams |
165
|
53
|
82.9
|
88.9
|
2.4
|
12.0
|
7.95
|
6.36
|
0.0
|
3.7
|
11.1
|
7.50
|
51.01
|
| D Mason |
178
|
55
|
78.1
|
86.6
|
3.4
|
10.0
|
8.84
|
7.07
|
0.0
|
11.1
|
2.0
|
1.88
|
44.27
|
| Williamson |
183
|
57
|
74.7
|
45.5
|
-11.6
|
11.0
|
7.92
|
6.10
|
2.3
|
0.0
|
2.0
|
7.50
|
25.17
|
| EKennison |
188
|
58
|
73.3
|
117.6
|
17.7
|
14.8
|
8.15
|
5.76
|
0.0
|
11.1
|
4.0
|
7.50
|
68.97
|
| Mi Clayton |
189
|
59
|
73.3
|
45.7
|
-11.0
|
10.0
|
7.62
|
6.22
|
5.3
|
3.7
|
0.0
|
7.50
|
29.37
|
| D Williams |
204
|
62
|
67.8
|
51.6
|
-6.5
|
5.0
|
8.84
|
7.07
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
2.0
|
1.88
|
18.33
|
| W Welker |
206
|
63
|
67.5
|
74.7
|
2.9
|
5.0
|
9.52
|
7.38
|
-2.0
|
0.0
|
4.0
|
0.50
|
27.27
|
| M Jenkins |
206
|
64
|
64.4
|
85.8
|
8.5
|
12.0
|
6.90
|
5.68
|
-2.0
|
0.0
|
7.0
|
7.50
|
45.61
|
| C Henry |
211
|
66
|
62.8
|
114.5
|
12.4
|
2.0
|
6.11
|
6.66
|
-1.0
|
3.7
|
5.4
|
2.50
|
37.73
|
| D Carter |
219
|
67
|
62.7
|
55.5
|
-2.9
|
10.0
|
8.59
|
8.26
|
7.3
|
0.0
|
5.0
|
1.50
|
37.77
|
| A Toomer |
224
|
68
|
62.3
|
54.0
|
-3.3
|
10.0
|
8.47
|
6.84
|
13.0
|
3.7
|
2.0
|
3.75
|
44.46
|
| K Walter |
226
|
69
|
62.1
|
16.3
|
-18.3
|
8.0
|
7.74
|
4.88
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.50
|
2.86
|
| T Brown |
226
|
70
|
60.8
|
64.2
|
1.4
|
2.0
|
9.52
|
7.38
|
-5.0
|
0.0
|
5.0
|
0.94
|
21.19
|
| M Booker |
228
|
71
|
60.0
|
112.6
|
21.0
|
10.0
|
8.62
|
7.96
|
2.3
|
7.4
|
11.1
|
2.50
|
70.83
|
| A Battle |
231
|
72
|
58.9
|
89.1
|
12.0
|
8.0
|
7.71
|
5.85
|
2.0
|
3.7
|
11.1
|
1.25
|
51.66
|
| P Crayton |
232
|
73
|
58.1
|
75.6
|
7.0
|
5.0
|
9.78
|
9.06
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
9.0
|
1.07
|
40.89
|
| T Copper |
236
|
74
|
57.4
|
57.3
|
0.0
|
5.0
|
10.79
|
9.10
|
1.1
|
0.0
|
5.0
|
0.50
|
31.41
|
| J Gaffney |
237
|
75
|
57.3
|
20.2
|
-14.8
|
2.0
|
9.52
|
7.38
|
2.3
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
3.75
|
10.13
|
| B Wade |
238
|
76
|
55.5
|
58.1
|
1.0
|
12.0
|
7.92
|
6.10
|
4.0
|
0.0
|
2.0
|
1.50
|
34.56
|
| M.Williams |
243
|
79
|
51.6
|
15.9
|
0.0
|
3.0
|
7.48
|
6.08
|
10.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
7.50
|
34.06
|
| N Burleson |
244
|
80
|
50.6
|
31.2
|
-7.7
|
3.0
|
8.56
|
9.10
|
4.0
|
3.7
|
0.0
|
2.50
|
23.13
|
| A Lelie |
251
|
81
|
49.0
|
49.0
|
0.0
|
8.0
|
7.71
|
5.85
|
1.1
|
7.4
|
0.0
|
7.50
|
37.54
|
| BrJohnson |
252
|
82
|
46.8
|
97.7
|
20.3
|
6.0
|
9.69
|
10.30
|
0.0
|
3.7
|
4.0
|
7.50
|
61.48
|
| R Caldwell |
253
|
83
|
45.9
|
100.5
|
21.8
|
3.0
|
9.52
|
7.38
|
-12.0
|
3.7
|
8.0
|
3.75
|
45.11
|
| H Baskett |
256
|
84
|
45.8
|
58.4
|
5.0
|
5.0
|
10.40
|
7.61
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
3.0
|
0.50
|
31.54
|
| M Bradley |
260
|
86
|
45.5
|
46.2
|
0.3
|
3.0
|
8.60
|
7.68
|
9.6
|
0.0
|
3.0
|
3.75
|
35.91
|
| M Stovall |
261
|
87
|
44.5
|
12.8
|
-12.6
|
5.0
|
7.62
|
6.22
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
2.50
|
8.70
|
| Jurevicius |
264
|
89
|
42.7
|
67.5
|
9.9
|
10.0
|
8.11
|
6.11
|
3.7
|
3.7
|
2.0
|
3.75
|
47.24
|
| D Hagan |
266
|
90
|
42.7
|
13.1
|
-11.8
|
5.0
|
8.62
|
7.96
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
2.50
|
12.28
|
| B Engram |
278
|
94
|
37.3
|
35.4
|
-0.8
|
5.0
|
8.56
|
9.10
|
16.6
|
3.7
|
0.0
|
3.75
|
45.92
|
| Sin Moss |
280
|
96
|
35.4
|
2.5
|
0.0
|
5.0
|
8.47
|
6.84
|
14.7
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
3.75
|
38.73
|
| E Wilford |
281
|
97
|
35.4
|
64.4
|
11.6
|
5.0
|
7.95
|
6.36
|
0.0
|
3.7
|
2.0
|
1.88
|
38.45
|
| S Parker |
283
|
98
|
33.5
|
62.8
|
11.7
|
10.0
|
8.15
|
5.76
|
0.0
|
0.0
|
1.0
|
1.88
|
38.47
|
| Randle El |
284
|
99
|
32.9
|
64.9
|
12.8
|
8.0
|
7.85
|
6.01
|
0.0
|
3.7
|
0.0
|
3.75
|
42.05
|















