Nate!? Where are you man?

Hey man, I am hoping you can answer this for me. What constitutes how many and what rounds comp. picks teams get in a draft? I understand it has to do with the loss of free agency, but I know it goes deeper than that. Maybe the amount of new salary contracts or the importance of their role in the prior season?

Since we both have more important things to tackle, I'll end up with this.

If YAC% is not definitive, then what does that say about YAC itself? Does it mean the yardage gained after the catch is due to the receiever's running ability, or where the QB puts the ball, or the play call by the OC?

In other words, YAC has questionable significance. It is referred to frequently enough that it has some de facto legitimacy. I think it's cool, but am starting to wonder why.

You’ve been at this longer than I have, so please take any claims I make in light of my relative inexperience on these subjects.

Without a proper context, stats just become numbers. Andre Johnson compared with Wes Welker does not carry much weight. A league-wide average of YAC% by position would allow for a calculation of an individual player’s deviation from the mean. Although, Harvin’s 80% is remarkable all on its own.

Similarly, Arian Foster has a curious YAC% of 126 (314 rec. yards, 397 YAC per Pro Football Focus). Since YAC is measured from the point of the reception, he was clearly getting the ball behind the line of scrimmage on those ridiculous bubble screens. At least that’s how I interpret this number.

Let’s try a different context: what does it say about a QB if the total YAC of his receivers is divided by his passing yards? Schaub is accused of not putting the ball in a position to for receivers to tack on extra yardage, yet his figure is 49.8% while Brady’s is 47.3%.

Does this calculation favor the skill of the QB over the receiver, or is it the other way around? Or should it be shared by both participants in some weighted fashion?

This YAC business comes off both wonky and nerdy, but I find it fascinating because it illustrates how football, a system comprising multiple interactions, can be quantified.

Any thoughts you can contribute are always appreciated.

Thank you, Nate, for the attribution. I need this sort of attention to convince Wes that I can contribute more than just Texans' insights.

If you haven't covered this advanced stat consider a new one: YAC as a percentage of total receiving yards. Everyone complains about Schaub's arm, but Montana did not have a rifle. He specialized on hitting Rice and Taylor in stride, then letting them create the big play.

Too many of Andre's patterns were down and in, where he had to turn and face the line of scrimmage. Whether this was by design or to compensate for Schaub's deficiencies I'm not sure. His YAC% was 35, while Welker's was 50%, and Harvin's an astounding 80% in his nine games. Does this indicate some relative value as a receiver?

Nate, I'm flattered you took my points per attempt concept and filled in the gaps. But I'm not a reader, I'm an FC assigned to the Texans: http://bleacherreport.com/users/877526-jeffery-roy

I through arguing with you about that post. Your "Rating" are dated on this page.

Nate,
Do you think once the Colts get their O-Line established that we'll get to see Luck throwing it to Fleener quite more often? They had great chemistry together and were always on the same page at Stanford. Any chance we'd get to see that recreated, perhaps on the same or an even higher level next season?

Hey Nate,
When the OL opens a hole for CJ2K he runs 94 yards for a TD. Maybe the Titans need to do something about the OL who can't protect anybody, before they give up on CJ...

Hey Nate,
Imagine my surprise when I'm reading an article on Bleacher Report and your face is on my sidebar! Small world. Enjoying your writing from Tokyo!