I read
@Cellar-Door's point as being something like "Given a receiver of fixed ability level (say, x), they will have more opportunities to get open as a #3 or #4 b/c worse defenders = easier to get open."
I read your response as saying two things
- "Given a receiver of poor ability (say 0.5x) promoting them from #3 or #4 to #1 or #2 will not make them better" ; and
- "Because the league-wide correlation is that QBs overwhelming pass to their #1s and #2s, #3s and #4s will never get significant opportunities, not matter how open they are."
The first of these is, OK, true enough. But I'm not sure it's related to what CD was saying
The second feels like it's potentially true if applied to teams with really great #1 and #2. But if on another team the #1 was only rarely open and the #3 was open all the time, I can imagine that team and QB making decisions that become, if you will, the exception that proves the rule
Sort of like how last weekend when Christian Gonzalez was defending Davante Adams (4 receptions in 7 targets, 57%) Aaron Rogers responded in part by (to your point) throwing to #2 Garret Wilson (5 of 8, 62.5%)... and also to his #3 through #6 targets (8 of 10, 80%).
One game sample size and all that, but I read CD's point as a version of "Hey, a fair amount of the time 80% is a bigger number than 57%" And your point as "Hey Garret Wilson's 8 targets were more than Tyler Conklin's 3 targets"
And, I mean, yes?