Another year, another what “could have been” for Garrett Wilson.
New York Jets fans like to believe that Wilson is one of the top receivers in the NFL. So do fans of many other teams, for that matter. After all, Wilson has put up Catch of the Year-worthy receptions in back-to-back seasons and has a flashy reputation from when he burst onto the scene as the Offensive Rookie of the Year in 2022.
Therefore, anything less than superstardom from Wilson is always pegged as an issue with his quarterback.
Still, it’s worth taking an under-the-hood look at Wilson’s 2024 season to try to answer a few fundamental questions.
- How good is Garrett Wilson, really?
- How much is he held back by the quarterback?
- What are the holes in his game, and can he improve them?
I performed the same exercise one season ago. A comparison with this 2024 review should provide a more complete picture of who Wilson is at this point in his career.
We will begin by reviewing Wilson’s analytical profile, followed by a film review to see whether the eye test supports the numbers.
By the numbers
Fans of Wilson love to point to his box score statistics. He put up his third consecutive 1,000-yard season, setting career highs in receptions (101), receiving yards (1,104), and touchdowns (7). That’s top-tier receiving production, right?
Not so fast. Wilson had the third-most targets in the NFL (152), which automatically gave him an edge in counting stats. As Jets X-Factor’s Michael Nania correctly asserted, citing aggregate numbers without considering rates is highly flawed.
Think about it. Receiver A had 150 targets and Receiver B had 110. Is it fair to compare Receiver A’s receptions, yards, and touchdowns to Receiver B’s? Does that give us any basis for comparison?
(Incidentally, Receiver B could be Ladd McConkey — who had more receiving yards than Wilson and the same number of touchdowns on 42 fewer targets.)
Rate and efficiency statistics
When you look at Wilson’s rate statistics among 70 qualified receivers (min. 60 targets), the picture is far less rosy.
Wilson ranked 41st in yards per route run (1.69) and 59th in yards per target (7.26). Those marks were both significantly worse than his rookie year statistics (1.85 yards per route run and 7.94 yards per target) when he caught balls from Zach Wilson, Mike White, Joe Flacco, and Chris Streveler.
Wilson also ranked 59th in EPA per target (0.142), 55th in DVOA (per FTN Fantasy, -8.9%), and 53rd in DYAR (per FTN, 45).* He was near the bottom of the league in multiple efficiency metrics.
* Note: DVOA (Defense-adjusted Value Over Average) and DYAR (Defense-adjusted Yards Over Replacement) are two efficiency-based metrics that take into account game context and opponent.
Still, it’s worth looking at Wilson’s numbers before and after Davante Adams arrived on the scene. Did Rodgers spamming Adams with targets decrease Wilson’s production?
Perhaps surprisingly, the answer is no. Wilson actually had more yards per target once Adams arrived. His percentile rankings either stayed the same or improved in each of the five categories with Adams beside him.
- Weeks 1-6: 1.63 yards per route run (45th percentile), 6.14 yards per target (13th), -0.031 EPA per target (22nd), -20 DYAR (19th), -16.5% DVOA (25th)
- Weeks 7-18: 1.73 yards per route run (45th percentile), 8.10 yards per target (41st), 0.273 EPA per target (39th), 65 DYAR (43rd), -3.1% DVOA (30th)
Wilson was still inefficient with Adams, but not nearly to the same extent.
Those efficiency numbers (season-long and split) can be taken somewhat with a grain of salt because they are impacted tremendously by the efficiency of the offense as a whole. All three of those statistics are largely situation-dependent. Wilson has always ranked poorly in EPA, DVOA, and DYAR because the Jets’ offense is terrible.
However, that is not necessarily the case with rate statistics. There are plenty of receivers in bad offenses who are far more productive on a per-route and per-target basis. That being said, rate statistics have several of their own flaws; the question is how relevant they are to Wilson’s situation.
No. 1 WR vs. No. 2
As a player falls lower in the passing progression, his yards per route run will generally decline. The WR2 in an offense might run almost the same number of routes as the WR1, but given that he’s seeing fewer targets, he’ll usually have fewer yards per route run. That theoretically applies to Wilson considering that he played second fiddle to Davante Adams for 11 of his 17 games.
However, as we saw above, that was not the case. Wilson’s yards per route run remained roughly the same with Adams, and his yards per target increased significantly.
In other words, Wilson actually became more efficient once Adams joined the Jets to pull away some of the double coverage. Therefore, the argument that his lower target rate post-Adams caused lower per-route yardage totals is incorrect.
Depth of target
Furthermore, a receiver is constrained by how his team uses him; a lower average depth of target could lower the receiver’s yardage output on a per-catch basis.
However, even that excuse does not hold up when compared to some of the best receivers in the NFL. Case in point is Puka Nacua, who had the 10th-lowest ADOT (8.0) but had one of the highest yards per route run marks of the last decade (3.56).
Although Wilson’s 9.4 ADOT was short (19th-lowest), it was 0.4 yards longer than Ja’Marr Chase — who won the receiving Triple Crown and ranked sixth in yards per route run. In today’s NFL where screens and other quick passes are the norm, top-tier receivers can produce efficiently no matter the depth of target.
This applies also to yards per target. Wilson’s 7.26 mark ranked in the 16th percentile among receivers. It’s easy to argue that his low depth of target had something to do with it, as shorter passes naturally lead to fewer yards on a per-target basis.
However, 16 of the other 19 receivers who had an ADOT at or below Wilson’s 9.4 mark had more yards per target; only D.J. Moore, Xavier Worthy, and Wan’Dale Robinson were lower.
Catchable passes
But, the other argument is, Wilson’s targets were far more erratic than other receivers’. After all, he caught passes from one of the least accurate quarterbacks in the NFL.
Aaron Rodgers was below average or worse in every single accuracy metric available (completion percentage, adjusted completion percentage, completion percentage over expected, catchable pass rate, bad pass rate, on-target rate, accuracy rate, etc.) from a number of statistical outlets (Pro Football Focus, Pro Football Reference, NFL Next Gen Stats, FTN Fantasy).
Therefore, it would seem that Wilson’s statistics would be negatively skewed compared to other receivers.
However, that’s not quite accurate, either. According to FTN, Wilson’s 72.5% catchable pass percentage ranked 32nd out of 72 qualifiers. His catchable pass rate was higher than 55.6% of qualified receivers — in other words, average.
True, players like Amon-Ra St. Brown (83%), Ja’Marr Chase (80%), Puka Nacua (77.4%), and Justin Jefferson (74.5%) had higher catchable target rates. But ultimately, it’s not as if Wilson’s targets were so wildly off-target that his statistics should be significantly adjusted because of that.
Additionally, some of Wilson’s supposedly uncatchable targets were, in fact, catchable had Wilson run the proper route. As we will see on film, especially early in the season, countless targets fell nowhere near Wilson because he did not adjust his route properly, whether to the coverage or Rodgers’ tendencies. That’s not the quarterback’s fault even though it will show up in the “uncatchable” column.
The bigger issue for Wilson was not how catchable his targets were, but how many of those catchable targets he caught. According to FTN, Wilson caught 91% of his catchable targets, ranking 38th out of 72 qualifiers (47th percentile).
Of course, being average in this area isn’t bad, but it’s just — average. For a receiver who purports to be elite, that isn’t good enough.
The film analysis will further investigate the accuracy of Wilson’s targets.
Bad offense
The other argument often thrown out in favor of Wilson is not just his quarterback play but how poor the offense has been as a whole. The Jets’ offense was undoubtedly poor this season: they ranked 21st in offensive DVOA with the same rank in passing DVOA.
However, the following receivers played in offenses with a worse passing and overall DVOA, and here are their numbers compared to Wilson’s yards per route run (1.69) and yards per target (7.26):
- CeeDee Lamb: 2.27 yards per route run, 8.18 yards per target
- Nico Collins: 2.87 yards per route run, 10.2 yards per target
- Malik Nabers: 2.17 yards per route run, 7.30 yards per target
- Calvin Ridley: 1.84 yards per route run, 9.0 yards per target
- Davante Adams: 2.04 yards per route run, 7.87 yards per target
- Adam Thielen: 2.06 yards per route run, 10.08 yards per target (in 10 games)
- Josh Downs: 2.20 yards per route run, 7.87 yards per target
It is notable that Nabers’ yards per target number is very similar to Wilson’s, showing how the compiling aspect can happen to a No. 1 receiver in a bad offense. But still, Nabers was far more efficient on a per-route basis.
Yardage efficiency is far from the best way to measure a receiver’s impact, since it ultimately still relies on raw yards. However, it’s hard to go by EPA, DVOA, DYAR, or any other efficiency-based metric that is heavily dependent on the offensive environment, making the yardage metrics the best way to compare receivers.
Think about who the quarterbacks were in some of these situations. Cooper Rush, Daniel Jones, Drew Lock, Tommy DeVito, Will Levis, Mason Rudolph, Bryce Young, Anthony Richardson, and Joe Flacco threw to most of these other guys. C.J. Stroud might be an exception, but his season-long statistics were not as far off from Rodgers’ as you might think.
If you go back over the last few years, players like D.J. Moore and Terry McLaurin have posted far superior efficiency metrics with equal or worse quarterback situations.
You can also argue that Moore’s return to earth in 2024 showcased just how bad things can get with a poor offense and quarterback situation. However, Wilson’s situation with the 2024 Jets was superior to Moore’s in both 2023 and 2024 in Chicago, with Justin Fields and Caleb Williams throwing him the football.
Contested catches
One area in which Wilson improved significantly was contested catches, at least from a statistical angle. After posting sub-35% rates in his first two seasons, he improved to 51.7% (15-for-29), which ranked 32nd among 70 qualifiers and 29th out of 56 receivers with at least 15 contested targets. In other words, he went from being at the bottom of the league to roughly average.
On film, there are many instances where Wilson failed to come up with a difficult catch. Not always were those labeled contested depending on the context. So while Wilson did a better job at catching balls in traffic than in his first two seasons, he still struggled with physicality at the catch point.
This will be explored more on film.
Yards after catch
Wilson’s most special trait was supposed to be his YAC ability. That was highlighted in his prospect profile and shone in his rookie season. However, his YAC production in 2024 was above average but certainly not elite; he averaged 4.4 YAC per reception, ranking 25th in the NFL (64th percentile).
That statistic becomes less impressive when considering that Wilson ranked 38th out of 84 qualified receivers (per NFL Next Gen Stats) with 36 YAC over expected. That means he was in the 55th percentile in creating more YAC than was readily available to him.
Ironically, this was despite Wilson’s No. 1 ranking among receivers in missed tackles forced (25). He also ranked third in missed tackles forced per reception (0.248). Although he made defenders miss routinely, he struggled to convert that into yardage.
To be completely fair to Wilson, YAC per reception can be a highly misleading statistic. Receivers who are given open space to work with on a regular basis will pile up YAC without necessarily having done much to earn it. Bill Belichick noted this in discussing the difference between yards after catch and yards after contact.
However, given the high number of missed tackles that Wilson forces and the relatively low output comparatively speaking, there does seem to be some indication that Wilson’s seeming proficiency after the catch comes in ways that do not necessarily impact his final yardage all that much.
Part of this was his inability to produce on screens. Among 20 receivers with at least 15 screen targets, Wilson ranked 19th with 4.4 yards per reception and last with 5.9 YAC per reception. Perhaps some of this was due to bad blocking, but Davante Adams managed to outdo him (6.5 yards per reception, 7.8 YAC per reception on screens).
We’ll see more of Wilson’s inability to produce YAC on the film and discuss why this happens.
Most receivers who produce at a high level with a low ADOT do so with elite YAC. Nacua, Chase, Chris Godwin, and Zay Flowers ranked in the top 10 in YAC per reception along with their low ADOT. Wilson had a below-average ADOT and somewhat above-average YAC, which does not lead to supreme efficiency.
Film
There are several ways to do a film review of a player, many of which are wholly unsatisfying.
- Show a snippet of a few plays and break them down in depth, using them to create a narrative about the player.
- Create reels of a number of plays each to highlight specific trends in the player’s performance without breaking down each play in detail.
- Create an hours-long review to get a very thorough sample of the player’s performance.
There is a further breakdown that can happen with each of these methods depending on the position of the player. For a wide receiver, a film review may focus only on plays where the receiver was targeted, or on all plays where he ran routes regardless of whether the ball came his way.
I watched every single route that Garrett Wilson ran in the entire 2024 season — targeted or not targeted. I do not have the time or the technical know-how to provide an hours-long review of Wilson’s performance; I leave that to Jets X-Factor’s Joe Blewett, who provides premium content unmatched anywhere else.
Jets X-Factor’s Andrew Fialkow also did weekly reviews showcasing a nice sample of plays, many of which involved Wilson.
However, I also feel that breaking down a play or two leaves this article open to accusations of cherry-picking. Anyone can choose one play and make a player look like a Hall of Famer or a practice squad player.
As some of the statistical evidence I provided above will undoubtedly be controversial, I feel that the only way to showcase Wilson’s performance is to create reels of plays showing trends in his performance.
I cannot provide a reel of all 653 routes that Wilson ran or even all 152 targets he had. In total, I clipped 151 plays of his season — some plays on which he was targeted and some on which he wasn’t.
Note that I ignored plays on which Wilson was double-covered or on which the route he was designated ran straight into the heart of the coverage (such as an in-breaking route with a hole defender). I also focused more on Wilson’s specific performance one-on-one than the coverage or concept as a whole.
Ultimately, there is no way for me to completely defend myself against the accusation of cherry-picking or framing the plays in a specific way. But I think self-honesty will require at least a careful consideration of the film evidence provided.
As Jets fans know, Wilson wears No. 5.
