Fantasy Football: The Too Many Mouths to Feed Fallacy

Photo: USA Today Sports

The term "too many mouths to feed" is often used for specific players or teams. This label may be put on players in systems with multiple players warranting the football. The 2022 season allows us to see up-to-date schemes and recent data to analyze. During the offseason, coaching changes and roster transactions will happen. These influence each team, which is an important reminder to individually analyze each team. The data provided is from the 2022 season, which allows a baseline to work from. This article will analyze the number of times a receiving option scored over 10 PPR points in a single game. This analysis was done on receiving production only; if a running back surpassed 10 points from receiving stats, they were included.

Two Coaching Systems

I would like to think everyone who watches football or plays fantasy football has a general idea of coaching systems. Here are two examples of coaching systems. Arthur Smith loves to run the football and diminishes the talents of Kyle Pitts and Drake London. This is an important reminder the NFL does not care about our fantasy football teams. On the contrary, Justin Herbert is in a system that favors throwing the ball. This means there is potential to find more fantasy-relevant assets; Keenan Allen (WR12-PPG), Mike Williams (WR22-PPG), and even Gerald Everett (TE13-PPG) were relevant assets from the 2022 season.

The Chargers running back's (Austin Ekeler) receiving stats from 2022 would have finished as WR22 (PPR). I know I used points-per-game for the receiving options and then total finish for the running back. I used what would prove my point. Okay, fine. Ekeler would have been WR33 in points-per-game for his receiving production. Moving on.

Too Many Mouths to Feed

Let's get into this idea there are too many mouths to feed. I gathered the data from the 2022 season and input it into the chart below. The chart contains each team's targets and receiving options over 10 points per game. This means rushing production was not factored in. If a running back had 10+ receiving points, they were factored in.

You should take the time to look over the chart before continuing to read. I do not need to bore you breaking down each team, we can clearly see the evidence showing mouths can be fed. It is interesting to see Detroit supporting over three options in 41% of games. Who would have thought? Here is a quick breakdown of the chart:

• Zero games:
  • You want to see a lower percentage in this category.
    • 10 teams had zero receiving options below 10 points.
    • Tennessee had 35% of games with zero options over 10 points.
• One:
  • We would like to see at least one option scoring 10 points.
    • 10 teams supported a fantasy-relevant option every week.
    • Tennessee had the least games with at least one option.
• Two:
  • It is fair to assume two receiving options can be fantasy relevant.
    • Three teams supported two options over 90% of games.
    • Eight teams supported two options over 75% of games.
    • Seven teams supported two options under 50% of games.
• Three
  • This is when we see the "too many mouths to feed" argument.
    • Four teams supported three options over 50% of games.
    • 12 teams supported three options for over 25% of games.
    • Chicago is the only team to have zero options to score 10 points in a single game.
• Four:
  • People are eating here.
    • Cincinnati had 31% of games with four options scoring 10 points.
    • Eight teams supported four options over 10% of games.
    • 13 teams did not support four options in a single game.

The data informs us of the possibility of multiple receiving options to score over 10 points in a game. The five teams supporting five options are due to a boom game. This data is a baseline for an understanding of the "too many mouths to feed" argument. We can see multiple mouths are fed. The biggest question is consistency. Which receiving options are consistently surpassing 10 points per game?

Consistency is Key

I will provide examples from the team's weekly stats. The above chart observed total targets. It is fair to assume when a team is throwing the ball more, they increase the potential to support multiple receiving options. I will note an example of low, average, and high passing volume offenses. These teams were picked based on if they were below, near, or above the league-average targets.

Detroit Lions (383 Targets)

Detroit had the second-fewest targets in the NFL. However, they supported three options in 41% of games and four options in 12%. This is intriguing to note. We need to understand consistency. Here is their weekly breakdown:

• Low passing volume
• One stud wide receiver
• Role players

Amon-Ra St. Brown was the consistent asset having 81% of games over 10 points. When looking at the other options, it is not exciting. Their production was variable, meaning we should not feel excited to plug them into your lineups. Side note, if you are playing Best Ball, it will behoove you to roster the second or third receiving option. When we do not know when a boom game will happen, best-ball settings have our backs. Low volume passing offense explains why there was one consistent option.

An important note is their first-round rookie selection, Jameson Williams, was recovering from an ACL injury. Detroit did not seem to rush him back into the offense upon his return in week 12. Detroit also drafted Jahmyr Gibbs in the first round of the 2023 NFL Draft. They may be looking to throw the ball more in 2023.