Positive Data Arguments for Henry Ruggs, WR Alabama
This is the part where I say “Henry Ruggs is the most controversial prospect in this year’s wide receiver class” and proceed to summarily trash everything about his hard work in college – because he underproduced, and I’m a “data guy.” I’ve heard similar on podcasts, twitter threads, my own DMs, and emails. And yet, it gives me no joy. As you know, a data-driven analyst like myself likes nothing more than tearing down a hardworking and talented player just for fun. But it’s not fun this year. People are angered by the opposite point of view in a way that, in my experience, is atypical of the type of disagreement we enjoy.
In that vein, I’ve been asking for the positive argument for Henry Ruggs. I would like to know, what, if anything, stands out about his play. After talking with Zac Reed (@tacitassassin13) from the Dynasty Dummies Podcast, and DLF’s own RayGQue (@RayGQue), I was left with the impression that it’s just his speed – something that was on spectacular display at this year’s NFL Scouting Combine where he ran a very impressive 4.27-second 40-yard dash. But that can’t be all everyone is seeing. Fortunately, AngeloFF (@angelo_fantasy) took the time, and a great deal of skill, to break down the positives he saw on tape from Henry Ruggs on Twitter for us:
‘Why Henry Ruggs III’
He is undoubtedly the most controversial player in this deep & talented 2020 class.
Henry Ruggs III's world-class athleticism was on full display at the NFL Combine, but why else are NFL evaluators enamored with him besides the physical traits?
Enjoy! pic.twitter.com/0j787Ii3MP
— AngeloFF (@angelo_fantasy) March 8, 2020
Angelo is very good at this kind of breakdown and, and while I still can’t contextualize non-recorded traits, it seems like very valuable insight.
Well, one good turn deserves another. If Angelo can take the time to do this incredible thread, I can take the time to ask: are their positives on Henry Ruggs’ production profile? What, if anything, will we look back and say: “well, if we’d noticed this, we’d have been higher on him” if he hits in the NFL?
Essentially, how would I try and shut myself up?
I’ve got your age-adjusted production, right here
If you are at all familiar with my evaluation process, you’ll know I like to compare prospects’ production to players who have been good in the NFL and adjust by the average expectation of those players at each age – which means, like players who produce in a similar way in college.
So, starting with my favorite stat, how could I “defend” Henry Ruggs? Especially considering he failed to even break out in college.
Below is a table of the major prospects in the 2020 wide receiver draft class and their dominator rating per year at each age they played. It’s sorted by their age-18 season.
Henry Ruggs, at 18 years old, was more productive (a bigger part of Alabama’s offense) than CeeDee Lamb was at Oklahoma. Lamb, as you know, is the consensus wide receiver one per DLF rankings, and almost everyone else right now.
Is this predictive? No. Is it a little cherry-picked? Yes. Does 16% mean he’ll hit? Not really. But it is notable that age 18, the hardest and most important year for age-adjusted production. At the competition level he played at, it’s impressive that he was a larger part of the offense than the consensus top player in this class.
Rugg and Role
Below is a table with the top 12 players in DLF’s current rookie rankings. On the right, you can see the percentage of team’s receiving yards above the conference average of a player’s team rank (in yards).
In other words, it shows if they were playing an outsize role for their position on the depth chart based on their conference (in their last year.) This is a good context stat because it compares them to players in the same conference playing behind or ahead of the same number of players.
Henry Ruggs may have been a WR3 for his team (he was) but he was putting up a level of production that was similar to a WR2 on most teams in the SEC. Now, 12% below the average for number ones (average share above expectation, AVG S/EX), is worrying. But 3.6% above average of his role on the team? That’s good.
This tells us that he wasn’t “just” a WR3 compared to other players. Ruggs was able to create some space around him for his position on the team, and his role was oversized at a high level.
Do you like touchdowns and points?
Around about now is where I’m probably meant to talk about Miami in 2003 or Clemson between 2011-2013. But the few times that multiple NFL-level players have played on the same college team doesn’t bode well for Ruggs, in my opinion. Frankly, the good players in those situations were typically able to meet more established thresholds in market share or yards per team. It’s too easy to compare Ruggs across those variables and find him wanting.
Outside of Martavis Bryant, who missed a lot of time, or Adam Humphries, who was an undrafted free agent (and isn’t the ceiling comparison anyone wants), Ruggs doesn’t compare well. Even on the most crowded, and loaded college teams, players who have hit in the NFL have had more volume and created a higher percentage of their team’s production.
I can feel you disagreeing with me. That’s okay. I’m actually trying to help. That is where I would go if I was trying to dismiss him, so it’s not where I want to go if I’m arguing for him.
Where can we see his value? What isn’t showing up in breakout age, market share or his position on the team depth chart? Well… do you like touchdowns? How about points? As fantasy players, we are big fans of both.
How good is 14 and 15 points per game? Very. And, once again, far above the average for a WR3 in any conference. Let’s compare this team to one of those crowded situations mentioned above.
Ruggs was scoring at the rate of the WR2, or WR1 for some teams – if we compare him to the NFL talent on Clemson between 2011 and 2013, during their NFL talent heavy era. We’re talking about DeAndre Hopkins-level points, or at least Sammy Watkins-level points, with Adam Humphries-level volume here. That’s not just hard to do, it’s incredibly impressive.
Here are the top five players in DLF Rookie Rankings and their points per game from the 2019 season.
Now, before we get too excited, these are touchdowns and points. They are more volatile and less predictive. For instance, in 2018 Reagor leads this group with more than 20 points per game – something Henry Ruggs never got close to (on less volume). But, it certainly looks a lot more like a player who belongs at the top of a wide receiver class.
This also speaks to his efficiency, which I’m told also shows up in his yards per target (which I don’t have access to). Efficient players like DeSean Jackson usually dominate in volume as well before breaking out in the NFL. That goes back to the overall “issue” data analysis has with his profile. However, seeing his fantasy production helped me understand a lot more what people watching the tape were seeing, and why they have been valuing him so high.
He doesn’t comp to John Ross, but why does that matter anyway?
This isn’t so much a positive, but a slight push back on one of the negatives I’ve seen listed. I know his physical metrics and Combine numbers look similar, and I’m not going to argue about his hands being an inch bigger – but the John Ross comparison feels weak to me.
For a start, was Ross good? Can he be good in the NFL? I really don’t’ think we’ve seen him play enough to know the answer. I’d like to just take the win because I was low on Ross, but I can’t in good faith say he was a miss.
He didn’t play. So we don’t know. This means any comparison to Ruggs doesn’t help us understand his potential in the NFL. What’s more, he played and produced differently to Ruggs in college.
I think his second season in 2017 is the closest comparison to Ruggs’ career. But Ross only played seven games that year, and his volume and points were a lot less than Ruggs. True, he also sees an outsized touchdown share, which shows up in his fantasy points. But the next year Ross is the leading wide receiver with high levels of volume and 22 PPG and a 30% or greater market share across the board. In production, that’s a very different kind of role.
Are we only using data that helps our argument, and ignoring the parts that don’t? Yes, I think that’s what a John Ross comparison may do. At best this comp tells us nothing about Ruggs’ potential, and at worst, it’s an inaccurate comparison designed to strengthen an argument with a preconceived conclusion.
I don’t mean that anyone who has made this comparison is wrong. Physically they profile very well. They play the position in a similar manner. They profile well in terms of draft capital and draft potential. But if we dig even a little deeper, I think the value of the comparison melts in our hands.
Not A Conclusion
This is not a mic drop article. I know we like to end with a conclusion and actionable fantasy information. But instead, I wanted to try and bridge the gap between what people see when they watch these players play, and how it shakes out when we quantify the situation and compare them. Also, I wanted to show that there are legitimate positives on his profile and perhaps offer some backup to those who like Henry Ruggs.
Fantasy football, and dynasty at its heart, is about being a fan of this game and these players. If you like Ruggs, that’s okay. In fact, it’s great. He was an amazing player for Alabama and will likely be rewarded with first-round draft capital in the NFL.
I still find him less likely to breakout for fantasy in the NFL. But it’s clear he is not a “bad” player and that shows up in the data to.
This is not a conclusion, hopefully it’s the start of a conversation on how this unusual profile could help us understand his and other players’ potentials in the NFL. He doesn’t compare well to players who have broken out in the NFL well based on market share, yards per team pass attempt, breakout age, or dominator. But he also doesn’t compare well to players who were not “good” in college either.
A good place to find an NFL unicorn, is a college unicorn. Personally, I’m not there on Ruggs, but I’ve seen enough misses and loved more than enough players who didn’t hit, to think that should mean those who are should give up and write him off. Sometimes, you really do have to just go get your guy. I hope some of this information might help you make the decision one way or the other, and give you a better idea of how he might play out after we see his draft position and landing spot.
Thanks for checking this out. Please let me know if you enjoyed it, if you didn’t, or what I may have missed that you’d like me to take a look at.
UDFA's matter | British ex-pat | Writer of things
- Peter Howard: Dynasty Fantasy Football Superflex Rankings Explained - March 6, 2024
- Dynasty Target and Regression Trends: Week 15 - December 23, 2023
- Dynasty Target and Regression Trends: Week 14 - December 16, 2023
