Statistical In-Ferentz, Week 11: McBananas
Yesterday the ten finalists were announced for the Biletnikoff Award, and Marvin McNutt was, sadly, not on the list. The trophy, given annually to the "nation's most outstanding college football receiver" is awarded by the Tallahassee Quarterback Club, oddly enough, and the fine folks there have decided on the following players:
- Keenan Allen, Cal
- Justin Blackmon, Oklahoma State
- Ryan Broyles, Oklahoma
- Patrick Edwards, Houston
- Michael Floyd, Notre Dame
- A.J. Jenkins, Illinois
- Sammy Watkins, Clemson
- Jordan White, Western Michigan
- Robert Woods, USC
- Kendall Wright, Baylor

Now McNutt's already good stats start to look even better: he is second in terms of percentage of team receiving yards, fifth in terms of percentage of team receptions, and second in terms of team receiving touchdowns. Also note that Houston's Patrick Edwards suddenly drops off the radar in a couple of categories, simply because Houston passes so damn much (his yards per catch are impressive, though). Even Justin Blackmon starts to look a little less outstanding when you factor in how pass-heavy his team is.
An alternative to using percentages would be to standardize the numbers somehow. If we look at each player in terms of his team's passing attempts, there are wide gaps: Justin Blackmon's Oklahoma State team has attempted 459 passes, while A.J. Jenkins' Illinois team has attempted just 271. But we can adjust for this discrepancy by dividing yards, receptions and touchdowns by team pass attempts, then multiplying the resulting per play averages by some standard number of team pass plays. I chose 382, because that was the average number for the Biletnikoff list:
The standardized numbers tell an interesting story: now Marvin McNutt jumps up to second in yards, fifth in receptions and first in touchdowns. And the jump for A.J. Jenkins is even more dramatic. There are some important caveats here, though. First, I didn't compare all college football players, so who knows if there is some other undeserving low-usage wide receiver out there. Also, every one of these 11 players is on a team that passes at least somewhat. If you tried to standardize the receptions of all the receivers on, say, Ohio State or Navy, you would get some nonsensical results.
A more serious caveat involves something known as the usage/efficiency trade-off. This is a well-known concept from the world of basketball, where a player typically sacrifices some efficiency (field goal percentage) as his usage increases (i.e. as he takes more shots). This is why some statheads are not too impressed with gunners like Carmelo Anthony or Allen Iverson: they score a lot, but their efficiency declines as their shot total goes up. Something similar probably applies to football. Wide receivers are much more dependent on their quarterbacks and play-callers for opportunities than shooting guards, but it's reasonable to assume that defenses adjust somehow when offenses decide to target the same player or same type of player (e.g. receiver) over and over again, whether by sending a double team or playing more nickel and deep zone defenses. If that's the case, then it is not a simple matter of saying that Marvin McNutt's or A.J. Jenkins' receptions would scale up if Iowa or Illinois ran more passing plays relative to run plays. Instead we would expect that opposing defenses would adjust somehow to take away this new emphasis, with the effect that McNutt's or Jenkins' receptions, yards and touchdowns would still increase, but at a slower rate. So maybe A.J. Jenkins wouldn't have 1600 receiving yards, and maybe Marvin McNutt would have only 11 touchdowns instead of 13. Likewise, the players on faster-paced, passing heavy teams might benefit from a boost in efficiency if they played in offenses that ran the ball more. It's hard to know. But as a starting point for thinking of these players not just in terms of pure counting stat production but production within a system of opportunity, then the standardized figures are worth at least considering.
There are still other concerns to address, however, like broader issues of overall team quality: does a receiver have a good quarterback throwing him the ball, a good offensive line protecting that quarterback, a good running game/secondary receivers to keep the defense honest (or, alternately, such a bad running game/secondary receivers that passing to the star is the only option), and a good (or very bad) defense to get the ball back to the offense as quickly as possible? And there is the issue of the quality of the opposition: is a team playing a pillow-soft schedule, like Houston, or a truly hard schedule, like Oklahoma State, Baylor or Oklahoma (this criterion does not do much for Marvin's case, by the way). Maybe the lesson is that the position of wide receiver is a fundamentally contingent one: whether a wide receiver catches a lot of receptions depends to a great extent on factors beyond his control: system, teammates, pace, opposition, game situations. In which case the only fair way to determine the award, it seems obvious, is by number of boss one-handed catches. Check and mate, McNutt.
But if we must rely on statistics to some extent, then factoring in pace and style of offense would seem to be a necessity, and if we do consider those factors, then a Big 10 wide will be a top candidate to win the Biletnikoff award this year. Unfortunately, that wide receiver will not be Marvin McNutt, and not just because Marvin didn't make the final ten. It will be A.J. Jenkins. Considering the limited opportunities Jenkins had to catch the ball and the poor overall quality of the Illinois offense, his achievements, which were already impressive, begin to look fantastic. 7.6 receptions per game in an offense that only averages 17 completions per game? 113 yards per game for a team that averages 384 yards a game in total offense? Yeah, that's pretty good. Only his touchdown totals look a little suspect, but that might have something to do with the fact that Illinois is 81st in the country in red zone scoring attempts per game. And when you add in the requisite RZF* adjustment, his numbers look even better.
* Ron Zook factor, currently a 1.5 multiplier for yards, receptions and touchdowns.
But as far as just the top 10 goes, however, it's hard to see how Marvin McNutt doesn't make the list. McNutt's numbers are similar in absolute terms to those of Keenan Allen, Michael Floyd and Sammy Watkins, and as a percentage of team production are far better. McNutt's touchdown totals and yard per catch average are top-notch as well. The only reason I can see for McNutt's omission, at least statistically, is his relatively low reception and yardage totals, both of which are related to Iowa's slow pace and predilection to run the ball. That and the whole slow-Iowa-slow-Big-Ten-slow stereotype. But come on, Biletnikoff Award voters. Don't buy into superficial, gaudy, misleading stats. Despite what ESPN might tell you, numbers frequently lie, and two counting statistics in particular -- receptions and receiving yards -- paint a misleading picture of wide receiver production this year.
34 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Someone at From the Rumble Seat just passed out.
Michael Floyd is an interesting situation, too. He’s not on the Biletnikoff list, either. His numbers are low, but he passes the eye test as an exceptional receiver, and will likely get drafted 100 spots ahead of McNutt. But is he any better than McNutt?
You got no fear of the underdog; That's why you will not survive!
by YouCanPutYourEddsInIt on Nov 15, 2011 11:01 AM CST reply actions
Michael Floyd is, in fact, on the Biletnikoff list.
"Let me finish or I will hammerpunch your clavicle." -Steve Youngblood
by SomeJerkPoster on Nov 15, 2011 11:43 AM CST up reply actions
And he shouldn't be.
He has 167 less receiving yards than Marvin on 12 more catches and 3 less TD’s. I just sit back and shake my head.
"West Texas seems to be full of fake boobs providing a comfortable shade for well-developed pot bellies" - Lycurgus (06/24/2011)
by BStylin Hawkye on Nov 15, 2011 12:09 PM CST up reply actions
Whoops. My mistake....
And yes – he shouldn’t be on the list.
You got no fear of the underdog; That's why you will not survive!
by YouCanPutYourEddsInIt on Nov 15, 2011 1:19 PM CST up reply actions
Draft
will likely get drafted 100 spots ahead of McNutt
You think McNutt goes somewhere in the mid-to-late 4th round or later? I can’t image that’ll be true. He’s late 2nd early 3rd material in my mind.
Please note that the internet does not, as of yet, have a sarcasm font.
I hope McNutt goes in the 2nd or early third round. I'm just skeptical that NFL front offices are biased.
You got no fear of the underdog; That's why you will not survive!
by YouCanPutYourEddsInIt on Nov 15, 2011 1:20 PM CST up reply actions
There are a lot of good receivers in this draft
Unless he really impresses at the combine, he could easily slip to the 4th or 5th round. That said, I think he’ll definitely impress on Sundays once he’s on the field.
"If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull." - W.C. Fields
If he can get his 40 time closer to 4.4, he'll jump up.
Otherwise, he’s probably about a 4th round pick. Some team is going to LOVE what they get with him though. His size is nice, but his HANDS are the selling point.
White Horn Gold Pants
4.4 sounds quite optimistic.
I spent half my life's earnings on wine, women & song. The other half I wasted.
by therealCatnuts on Nov 15, 2011 8:14 PM CST up reply actions
McNutt was robbed.
So was Jeremy Ebert. Both deserve to be on this list, arguably ahead of Jenkins, even….
I don't know,
Jenkins has a hell of a case too. I think they both should be on there. I really think Patrick Edwards shouldn’t be there.
They say you're a pitcher, you're sure not much of a dresser. We wear caps and sleeves on this level, son.
"But how else are we to compare receivers except by counting stats like receptions and yards? "
You watch the games.
Looking at stats in a vacuum might not tell you that Joe Average at Texas Tech is just not as inherently exciting or talented as AJ Green of Georgia or Julio Jones at Bama (citing last year’s guys so as not to muddy the current year conversation)
that leeches a bit into your observation about system, but you gotta think these voters have an obligation to WATCH SOME FOOTBALL before voting.
HAHAHAHAHAH
I suppose you want the poll voters to watch the teams they’re voting on too. Madness, I tell you, madness!
"'Contrariwise,' continued Tweedledee, 'If it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic." - Lewis Caroll, Alice Through the Looking Glass
by chitownhawkeye on Nov 15, 2011 4:53 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
College football awards voters are lazy and uninformed?
There’s some breaking news. But nice analysis, these are always fun reads.
Im calling it now
McNutt in the late first round, he doesnt make it past the early second without a doubt.
and ESPN will be like "what the hell? why take this kid instead of “bigger name WR from somewhere else”?
and then he will pull a Angerer and make those ESPN guys look like idiots.
"Your spelling and grammar errors belie a seriously skilled thought process"- therealCatnuts
by justsomehawkeyefan on Nov 15, 2011 12:50 PM CST reply actions
I hope you're right
But Greene and Clark aside, Iowa’s skill position history hasn’t exactly been stellar in the NFL. I’d say a round later than what you’re suggesting (and ESPN will still say that at that point)
Please note that the internet does not, as of yet, have a sarcasm font.
You called Blake Rasing's B10 title out of nowhere, so there's that.
Maybe you’re correct on this one as well. I don’t think so, but I hope so.
I spent half my life's earnings on wine, women & song. The other half I wasted.
by therealCatnuts on Nov 15, 2011 1:24 PM CST up reply actions
this has been my thinking since last year also.
Although he doesn’t have the “elite” speed NFL teams are looking for I think someone’s gonna take a chance on him for his playmaking ability. I forsee him as a great position receiver like another Marvin….Harrison.
Either way, look forward to watching him on Sundays next year.
I'd take him over Roy Williams for the Bears
any day of the week
"He lowballed us and said: 'Take it or leave it. If you don't take our offer, you are rolling the dice.' I said: 'Consider them rolled.' " - Jim "Huge Brass Balls" Delaney
by ClaybornSmash on Nov 15, 2011 4:03 PM CST up reply actions
I'm a Cowboys fan and I agree with this in regards to Roy Williams.
"West Texas seems to be full of fake boobs providing a comfortable shade for well-developed pot bellies" - Lycurgus (06/24/2011)
by BStylin Hawkye on Nov 15, 2011 5:00 PM CST up reply actions
I see McNutt being money on 3rd down for a lot of teams
He doesn’t have to bust 20-40 yard receptions every game to be a great receiver in the NFL. Marvin has the talent to get 1st downs, and a lot of NFL teams need a reliable possession receiver that can block and that’s also tall… Marvin can fill all of those needs.
Never *question* Bruce Dickinson!
http://www.thebirdcult.net
by The Bird Cult on Nov 15, 2011 5:39 PM CST up reply actions
I've been hoping since last year that he ends up with the Vikings.
We need a big guy SO BAD! He would be a perfect complement for Percy Harvin.
White Horn Gold Pants
by DM_Purp on Nov 15, 2011 7:50 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Someone give me an Email that i can send my hatemail to
McNutt not being in the top 10 is criminal in my mind.
"Your spelling and grammar errors belie a seriously skilled thought process"- therealCatnuts
by justsomehawkeyefan on Nov 15, 2011 12:52 PM CST reply actions
It's McNutts.
"I mean, are they going to poop their pants or are they going to get tough?" ~Tom Brands
Exactly my reaction to the list
"He lowballed us and said: 'Take it or leave it. If you don't take our offer, you are rolling the dice.' I said: 'Consider them rolled.' " - Jim "Huge Brass Balls" Delaney
by ClaybornSmash on Nov 15, 2011 1:10 PM CST up reply actions
The far better half of Keenan & Kel

I spent half my life's earnings on wine, women & song. The other half I wasted.
by therealCatnuts on Nov 15, 2011 1:25 PM CST up reply actions
Indy's girlfriend?
"Pursue happiness... with diligence."
by Bucketochicken on Nov 15, 2011 1:51 PM CST up reply actions
i dont know if this makes sense or would be true
If a team passes a lot then one would expect the opposing team to defend the pass more than defending the run. So if that’s the case, I would expect the passing team to have a higher run efficiency than a team that predominantly runs the ball? I.e. more yards per attempt but a low number of attempts? If this is true, then a receiver who has a high receiving efficiency on a team that has high running efficiency would mean the opposing team is doing more to try and shut down the receiver, but yet the receiver is still excelling. Therefore, a ratio of receiver efficiency to team rushing efficiency being lower would mean the receiver is doing more for his team.
by RH's Bookie on Nov 15, 2011 2:10 PM CST via mobile reply actions
It depends
A strong running team that continues to run(Wisconsin when not playing in the Rose Bowl), may have a massive offensive line so it doesn’t matter how much you commit to stop them from running they will still run and they will still succeed.
White Horn Gold Pants
I htink you also have to factor in
That the Big 12 (10? 8?) isn’t exactly known for keeping any offense under 40 points a game and under 300 yards a game passing
Oklahoma state and oklahoma are both NOT in the top 50 of either catigory
by kohawkeyefever on Nov 16, 2011 11:24 AM CST up reply actions

by 

















