By the Numbers: College AIR

George Kritikos

lippett

The analytics revolution in sports has not only led to many new statistics used by front offices, but it has also spawned many creative minds to do the same for fantasy owners. Everyone is looking for the next projection model or statistic that is going to help them gain an edge on their competition. This series will try to help discern fact from fiction when it comes to the usefulness of statistics on fantasy performance.

In this edition, I am taking from Eric Hardter and “borrowing” his AIR metric and applying it to the 2015 NFL wide receiver draft class. I won’t bore you with the details of this metric, Eric has successfully done that and you can find it here.

A special thanks to Vincent (twitter: @LususNaturae0) who pointed me to some key data needed to conduct this analysis.

Why use AIR on college receivers?

Think about all the college offenses out there and their variations. It is hard to separate statistics and attribute them to the pace of the offense, quality of the quarterback, and the receiver’s place in the pecking order. These things can be accounted for with AIR because it normalizes a player’s efficiency relative to the team. While sample is important, the difference between 60 and 100 targets is greater when looking at seasonal statistics. Using AIR allows us to take those targets, compare them to the team’s total passing, and then compare the contribution to fantasy they account for relative to the team.

Now, like any metric, it has limitations and should be used as an input to an overall analysis as opposed to the authority on ranking players. AIR leans towards big plays as they will create a larger gap of % of fantasy points relative to % of team targets. That’s fine in the sense that we want players who make make plays (and score touchdowns), but a low volume player who breaks a few 80-yard touchdowns suddenly becomes a stud and while I don’t have the data to back this up, I think this is more frequent in college due to talent disparity. This doesn’t discredit using AIR, rather, it tells us to be mindful and put the results into context.

How did the draft class fair?

Let’s just lay it out there and provide the full AIR scores for all seasons available. Below you find all wide receivers projected to be drafted by CBSSports.

[am4show have=’g1;’ guest_error=’sub_message’ user_error=’sub_message’ ]

collegeair

Did you absorb the list? Good, me neither. Instead, we can walk through some key players and outliers to try and put some context to their numbers.

Stock Up

Titus Davis, WR Central Michigan – If you are looking for a player in the latter portions of a rookie draft, Davis looks like a solid choice. His AIR numbers never dip below 1.27 in his four years at Central Michigan, which speaks to his 18.1 yards per reception and 37 career receiving touchdowns (eight or more in each season). Davis is not a combine warrior and doesn’t win with athleticism; he is a polished route runner who can track the ball extremely well.

DeVante Parker WR, Louisville – Parker stands out to me as one of the most impressive on this list. Three seasons of a 1.30 AIR or better equals Titus Davis. It shows Parker’s ability to make big plays with the opportunities given (touchdown every 7.9 targets). He has been overlooked and slotted third behind Kevin White and Amari Cooper but his on-field numbers suggest he should be right in the mix at the top of the rankings.

Devin Smith, WR Ohio State – That 2014 AIR number of 2.21 is the highest season any player has recorded in the last ten years. It is the result of a 48 target season of 33 catches, 931 yards and 12 touchdowns. Scoring on every four catches is not sustainable, nor is a 28.2 yard per catch average, but it speaks to Smith’s ability to beat coverage. Additionally, his 69% catch rate in 2014 buoyed his 59% career number, further advancing the career year theory. Overall, Smith has obvious talents and when he puts them together, he can put up elite numbers. I consider him a boom or bust target but he should be considered a great round two or three rookie target as he may have the greatest upside in the class.

Breshad Perriman, WR UCF – Perriman is another big play threat with over twenty yards per catch in both 2013 & 2014. His AIR numbers have been strong both seasons and saw a jump in 2014 largely a result of the nine touchdown catches despite a decline in catch rate (from 62% to 53%). His 40 yard dash at the pro day only adds to the intrigue around Perriman, but he has the production to back up the athleticism.

Stefon Diggs, WR Maryland – Diggs is interesting in that his raw numbers are unimpressive, but Maryland is a poor passing offense, making his performances look much better in context. Maryland was the 73rd most proficient offense in producing receiver fantasy points, not quite Army bad (155 FPs) but Washington State (1,427) had more than double Maryland’s output (631). This is a consistent problem in his Maryland career so being able to make big plays in a substandard offense is indicative of his talent. Diggs isn’t a first rounder but these are the kind of players who are worth flyers in the middle rounds (third or fourth) with the upside to outperform their draft position.

Stock Flat

Nelson Agholor, WR USC – I say flat for Agholor because I’m already very high on him (I can see him as a late first round option above that Ameer Abdullah tier of running backs) and his numbers here confirm it. The AIR metrics seem tame, but keep in mind they measure relative to the team’s performance and he has had some good receivers next to him. He outperformed Marqise Lee (1.17 to 1.00) in 2013 and JuJu Smith (1.13 to 0.94) in 2014, both receivers who have been more highly touted. Agholor has the looks of a high volume PPR option (72% catch rate in 2013 and 2014 combined) with more explosiveness than last year’s PPR darling, Jarvis Landry.

Amari Cooper, WR Alabama and Kevin White, WR West Virginia – Nothing really stands out in their numbers that make me shy away from their status at the top of the receiver pile. They managed to record solid AIR numbers in 2014 with over 150 targets each, which highlights two things: their ability to make big plays and being efficient with targets (71% catch rate for Cooper in 2014, 69% for White). If you are investing a high draft pick in a wide receiver, those two aforementioned points are key to their ascension to WR1 on their own team (and potentially, your dynasty team).

Stock Down

Jaelen Strong, WR Arizona State and Sammie Coates, WR Auburn – A pair of wide receivers who have fluctuated between the late first and early second rounds of rookie drafts, both have been more flash than substance according to AIR. Eerily similar declines in 2014 had both below an AIR score of one, implying that their share of targets was greater than their share of receiving production for the team. For Strong, he received the targets (152), but a 54% catch rate was partially to blame for his lackluster production. Coates is not known for his hands and a 2014 catch rate of 45% (34 catches on 75 targets) backs that up, making it difficult to provide fantasy production on pair with his target share (23%). I was on the fence with these two to begin with and now I’m more confident on passing on them given the price tag needed.

Devin Funchess, WR Michigan – I hate piling on a guy who has been nitpicked throughout the draft process but this is another red flag for me. The catch rate reducing in 2014 (from 63% to 54%) has some influence from the quarterback situation in Ann Arbor, but he did little with the ball anyway. All Wolverines’ receivers dealt with that same issue and he could barely exceed the water mark (1.0 AIR) despite being the most talented option. That’s not what you want to see from a player being drafted in the late first of rookie drafts.

[/am4show]