I love buying my boy toys. Wait. That didn’t come out right. I love buying my child, who is a boy, items to play with for his enjoyment. The smile on his face, the hug I receive, and the “Thank you, daddy. I love you” are what make it all worth it. But, but, but….the better half of me always smacks some reality into my life. “You bought anoooooooooooother toy? He has too many! What about <insert random toy> he just got? You know he’s going to play with it for a week then dump it into the corner like all the rest, right?” This time will be different, I say. Fast forward to a few weeks and…..Yup. Rinse and repeat. That is why she is the better half. Anyways, as with my caveman ancestors, I evolved and stopped buying so many toys. As a result, my boy started going back to the OGs, the old reliables, the go-tos, and they produced and brought joy into his life. I see the same dynamic play out in the fantasy football landscape. The shiny new toy comes in and takes the league by storm, pushing the reliable veteran to the side. For 2020, D. K. Metcalf is being drafted as the 47th overall player while Tyler Lockett has a 58 ADP in NFFC drafts from 5/1 to 6/21. That’s crazy to me and here’s why:

I get the allure of Metcalf. He’s 6′ 3″, 228 pounds, and runs a 4.33 40-yard dash. As the season went on, the route tree expanded somewhat and he was utilized from all aspects of the field. Are drafters selecting Metcalf ahead of Lockett because Metcalf receives more high-value targets like red zone looks or deep passes? Well, check out the updated player pages that Rudy the Wizard has created: Lockett. Metcalf. Lockett receives more short area targets, but he garners just as many deep targets as Metcalf. 

If we go to their PlayerProfiler pages, here are the numbers:

  Deep Targets Completed Air yards Red Zone Receptions True Catch Rate Drop Rate Avg Target Distance Fantasy Pts / Pass Route Fantasy Pts / Target
Lockett 26 803 17 87.2% 1.8% 13.5 0.53 2.14
Metcalf 24 653 6 70.7% 8% 13.8 0.43 1.85

Lockett had more red zone receptions and Metcalf had no advantage in deep shots. The huge difference is in the catch and drop rates. That is one of the main reasons why I can’t put Metcalf ahead of Lockett, and the reason why Russell Wilson will rely on Lockett when push comes to shove.

Lockett finished last season with 82 catches on 110 targets for 1057 yards and 8 touchdowns. That is an impressive season, but during the Week 10 game against the 49ers, Lockett left the game and was taken to the hospital to “avoid a pretty severe situation.” The Seahawks had a bye the following week and Lockett was able to return for the Week 12 game against the Eagles, but the numbers show that the injury affected his performance.

  G TGT REC YDS TD CATCH% Y/TGT
Pre-injury 9 72 59 767 6 81.9 10.65
Post-injury 6 34 20 264 2 58.8 7.76

His season could have been better! I think many are overlooking the impact Lockett’s injury had to his final numbers. 

As a result, Lockett is being undervalued this season and could return a decent profit at his current ADP. He finished as the 13th WR last season and is being drafted as the 22nd receiver off the board. 

  1. Dase says:
    (link)

    Even after the week 10 injury, if we eliminate weeks 11-13, in which he saw a total of nine targets, for four catches and total of 64 yards. It’s the final six games (four regular season and two playoff games) that I want to bring to your attention.

    47 targets, 7.8 targets
    32 catches, 5.3 catches
    424 yards, 70.6 yards
    3 touchdowns, .5 TDs

    92.4 fantasy points, 15.4 points per game, WR15 for points per game.

    If we go and take a look at DK Metcalf during this same six games

    47 targets, 7.8 targets
    25 catches, 4.2 catches
    414 yards, 69 yards
    3 touchdowns, .3 TDs

    84.4 fantasy points per game, 14.6 points per game, WR25 for points per game

    Currently over in best ball drafts, since May 20th, Metcalf is WR21 with pick 52.44 and Lockett is WR22 with pick 52.82.

    • Son says:
      (link)

      Good stuff, Dase!

      • Dase says:
        (link)

        Thank you!

Comments are closed.