Each year I try to share comprehensive receiving stats, rushing stats, etc., but usually I get to it before now. Better late than never, right? I always have grand intentions for all I’m going to accomplish in the offseason, and then suddenly it’s August and there’s a bunch left on the to-do list.

Anyway, below is a boatload of 2017 college football receiving stats of the standard and advanced variety. Just in time for CFB fantasy football drafts, I guess. A couple of notes:

One of my primary goals for this offseason (tick tock) was to further explore the marginal efficiency and explosiveness data I discussed way back in January.

* Marginal Efficiency: the difference between a player’s success rate* (passing, rushing, or receiving) or success rate allowed (for an individual defender) and the expected success rate of each play based on down, distance, and yard line.

* Marginal Explosiveness: the difference between a player’s IsoPPP** (passing, rushing, or receiving) or IsoPPP allowed (for an individual defender) and the expected IsoPPP value of each play based on down, distance, and yard line.

For offensive players, the larger the positive value, the better. For defensive players, it’s the opposite — the more negative, the better.

* Success rate: a common Football Outsiders tool used to measure efficiency by determining whether every play of a given game was successful or not. The terms of success in college football: 50 percent of necessary yardage on first down, 70 percent on second down, and 100 percent on third and fourth down.

** IsoPPP: the average equivalent point value of successful plays only.

The idea is to explore efficiency and explosiveness, using my two primary tools (success rate and IsoPPP) and applying adjustments based on expectation. You can’t rip off a 70-yard run from your opponent’s 20, so setting a moving bar can help us get closer to the truth. So, too, can evaluating successes and non-successes based on whether it was third-and-1 or third-and-19.

For receivers, this data can be used to give us a better idea of degree of difficulty. If you play in a run-first offense, and most of your targets come on third-and-9, your stats are going to suffer. But if you’re catching a lot of short, easy passes on first-and-10, your expected success rate is going to be higher. So maybe this evens the playing field a bit.

First things first: if you’re wanting to play with this data yourself — and I highly encourage you to do so — you can find a Google doc here. There are tabs for all targets, WRs only, TEs only, RBs only, and Other (basically, Tommy Stevens and defenders). If you play with it, make sure I see the results. Curious how other people might use this.

But on with the show.

Let’s start with the high-target WRs.

Below is a table with every wideout targeted at least 80 times last fall.

First, some averages from this group. I would like to do a better job of establishing baselines for this stuff so you know at a glance what’s good and what’s not.

• Catch Rate: 62.9%
• Yards Per Catch: 13.7
• Yards Per Target: 8.6
• Success Rate: 49.5%
• Marginal Efficiency: +9.5%
• Marginal Explosiveness: +0.23 points per successful play

Based purely on this sample of 104 receivers, here are the 24 players who hit at least the 50th percentile in both marginal efficiency and marginal explosiveness. Players in bold return in 2018:

• A.J. Brown (Ole Miss)
• Anthony Miller (Memphis)
• Calvin Ridley (Alabama)
• Cedrick Wilson (Boise State)
• DaeSean Hamilton (Penn State)
• David Sills V (WVU)
• Davon Grayson (ECU)
• Diontae Johnson (Toledo)
• J’Mon Moore (Missouri)
• Jalen Guyton (North Texas)
• James Gardner (Miami (OH))
• James Washington (Oklahoma State)
• Jaylen Smith (Louisville)
• Jordan Lasley (UCLA)
• Ka’Raun White (WVU)
• Keke Coutee (Texas Tech)
• Korey Robertson (Southern Miss)
• Marcell Ateman (Oklahoma State)
• Marcus Green (ULM)
• Marquise Brown (Oklahoma)
• N’Keal Harry (Arizona State)
• Tre’Quan Smith (UCF)
• Trevon Brown (ECU)
• Tyre Brady (Marshall)

Now let’s raise the bar a bit: Here are the players who hit the 80th percentile in both:

• A.J. Brown (Ole Miss)
• Cedrick Wilson (Boise State)
• Diontae Johnson (Toledo)
• J’Mon Moore (Missouri)
• James Washington (Oklahoma State)
• Jordan Lasley (UCLA)
• Keke Coutee (Texas Tech)
• Marcell Ateman (Oklahoma State)
• Tre’Quan Smith (UCF)

Of last year’s high-usage WRs, Brown and Johnson are your two most well-rounded returnees. Most of Toledo’s receiving corps is back, actually, so whoever replaces Logan Woodside’s got an embarrassment of riches at his disposal.

Jasen Vinlove-USA TODAY Sports

I was curious about the next batch down, too, the players targeted between 40 and 79 times. Who were the standouts in this group? I figure that might be a way of finding out this year’s best breakout candidates.

Among this large group (243 WRs), eight players were in the 80th percentile of both marginal efficiency (which I’ll abbreviate with mEff below) and marginal explosiveness (mExpl). Seven of them return in 2018. (Again, returnees in bold.)

• CeeDee Lamb, Oklahoma (814 yards, +20.4% mEff, +0.67 mExpl)
• Cody Thompson, Toledo (537 yards, +23.7% mEff, +0.74 mExpl)
• Dredrick Snelson, UCF (695 yards, +17.8% mEff, +0.52 mExpl)
• James Proche, SMU (816 yards, +18.4% mEff, +0.84 mExpl)
• R.J. Turner, ULM (686 yards, +17.2% mEff, +0.49 mExpl)
• Terry Godwin, Georgia (711 yards, +19.5% mEff, +0.53 mExpl)
• Turner Smiley, North Texas (623 yards, +16.2% mEff, +0.59 mExpl)
• Will Hastings, Auburn (525 yards, +20.3% mEff, +0.71 mExpl)

Marquise “Hollywood” Brown and CeeDee Lamb. One batch of Oklahoma skill corps stars leaves, and another one takes its place.

Robert Hanashiro-USA TODAY Sports

Alright, let’s move to tight ends.

Here are the 66 tight ends with at least 30 targets in 2017.

Same test. Here are the 14 tight ends who were in the 50th percentile in both. Returnees in bold, and the three 80th-and-80th guys have asterisks.

• Albert Okwuegbunam, Mizzou
• Blake Mack, Arkansas State
• Cam Serigne, Wake Forest
• Dalton Fackrell, Colorado State
• Harrison Bryant, FAU
• Ian Thomas, Indiana
• Jared Rice, Fresno State*
• Joey Magnifico, Memphis
• Jordan Akins, UCF*
• Kaden Smith, Stanford
• Mark Andrews, Oklahoma*
• Noah Togiai, Oregon State
• Ryan Izzo, FSU
• Ryan Smith, Miami (Ohio)

Get to know the name. It’s pronounced Oh-koo-WAY-boo-nam.

Christopher Hanewinckel-USA TODAY Sports