When I sit down to write this column every week, sometimes the subject matter comes leaping out of the numbers
Sometimes, however, it's not that simple. The trends seem to disappear; the numbers lack a clear message. When I find myself in such a bind -- like this week -- I am reminded of Einstein's quote. Some of the best research comes from the diligent pursuit of ... well ... wacky ideas.
I've been looking for ways to make use of targeting statistics in our
Armed with my Einstein-inspired theory, I asked Mighty Max to produce a list of every player with at least 48 targets in 2008. Why 48? Because it seemed to me that an average of three looks a game seemed reasonable as a minimum.
Once Max had produced the list, I began to think of ways that I could add "quality" to the list; that is, how could I compare players with the same number of targets and determine who was likely to be productive in 2009? I thought about it for a while, and I decided to use
Finally, the last parameter I threw into the mix is that the targeted players are playing with the same QB in 2009 that they teamed with in 2008 (or else the whole "trust" factor becomes moot). As always, Max obliged:
The RB list has a lot of names that cannot be considered "sleepers", but there are three players that are likely to be late-round handcuffs:
Looking at the wide receivers, I was really surprised to see that the most "trustworthy" WR was
Among the TEs,
There you are, a brand new statistic to add to your draft day arsenal. When your buddies ask you where you got the idea to take