Waldman said it’s the highest grade he’s ever given a WR. That’s awfully bold.
Something I learned about charting and creating grades for players last year, is that it really depends a lot on what you watch.
I think it is hard to give every player a fair shake as some just have more plays to chart than others. I ran into a problem similar to sample size in that some players just not getting the ball as much as others in cut ups of games.
Even though I was looking for 13 different traits for each play on each player, the number of plays was higher than others.
The only way to try to balance this out is to give a grade per play, but even then I am somewhat uncertain about the charted results.
To give an example, for Nick Chubb last year I only charted his post injury games. He was splitting with Sony Michel and neither of them were getting the ball that much on a per game basis.
So my grades for both a lot lower than RB who didn't split and got more plays per game.
With Chubb it actually took me 11 games before I found one where he graded well compared to others. It was a game where he actually got the ball a lot.
Point being that the method of grading should find a way to make this fair and objective as possible for all players.
I haven't figured out how to do that well enough to be satisfied with the results.
It seems to me that types of charting and grading are changing over time. Even Lance Zeirlien who's grades I tracked over several years changed their methodology a bit every few years.
The grades do not all match up. Especially when you change your method.