Best Ball Analyzing Target Efficiency: How Yards Per Target Predicts Fantasy Consistency
Analyzing Target Efficiency
Target efficiency — yards per target — tells you what each look is worth, and it’s more stable year-to-year than raw target count. Two receivers with 100 targets can produce 1,000 or 800 yards depending on efficiency, so pairing efficiency with volume predicts production far better than counting targets alone.
| Receiver type | Yds/target | Profile |
|---|---|---|
| Deep specialist | 12+ | Air-yards driven; high ceiling |
| Dual-threat | 9–11 | Mixed routes, skilled at both |
| Slot specialist | 7–8 | Short routes; volume-dependent |
| Combine with | Target share | High share + high efficiency = elite |
Why target efficiency is more predictive of future production than raw target count: two receivers with 100 targets may produce different fantasy outputs; the receiver at 10 yards per target produces 1000 yards; the receiver at 8 yards per target produces 800 yards; efficiency determines what each target is worth; efficiency is more stable year-to-year than target count (target count can vary due to injuries, depth chart changes, while efficiency is more dependent on the receiver’s skill).
Analyzing Target Efficiency in Best Ball
The target efficiency framework:
The structure: (1) the yards per target calculation: total receiving yards divided by total targets; (2) air yards per target: the average depth of the air yards traveled per target; air yards per target is independent of YAC and predicts deep-route specialization; (3) yards after catch per target: total YAC divided by targets; YAC efficiency is independent of air yards and predicts receiving skill and elusiveness; (4) connect efficiency to target share analysis — target share and target efficiency together determine total receiving production; high target share + high efficiency produces elite production; low target share with high efficiency is a mid-tier receiver who is efficient with limited opportunities.
How target efficiency predicts best ball production:
The prediction: (1) the high-efficiency deep-route receiver: 80 targets, 12 yards per target (mostly air yards), produces 960 yards; this receiver gets open downfield consistently and is a high-ceiling target; (2) the low-efficiency volume receiver: 120 targets, 6.5 yards per target (mostly YAC dependence), produces 780 yards; this receiver receives volume but produces fewer yards per target; (3) the efficiency stability: receivers with 10+ yards per target have more stable year-to-year efficiency than receivers at 6–7 yards per target; efficiency correlates to route quality and skill; high-efficiency receivers are more likely to maintain efficiency if they remain in similar roles; (4) connect efficiency analysis to usage trends — target efficiency paired with usage trends identifies which receivers are likely to maintain production increase; a receiver with increasing target share and stable/increasing efficiency is trending up.
Efficiency by route type:
The efficiency: (1) deep-route specialists (post routes, go routes, verticals): 12+ yards per target because every target is asking the receiver to create distance; (2) slot specialists (slants, hitches, quick outs): 7–8 yards per target because the routes are shorter and quicker; (3) the dual-threat receiver: 9–11 yards per target because they run a mix of route types but are skilled at both; (4) connect efficiency by route type to route tree analysis — the route tree guides which route types earn high or low efficiency; deep-route receivers naturally earn higher efficiency from the route design.
Worked Example: Same 100 Targets, 200 Yards Apart
Two receivers each drew exactly 100 targets last season, so a manager eyeballing target counts treats them as equivalent opportunities. Split by efficiency and they’re not close. Receiver A averaged 10.5 yards per target — a downfield, dual-threat profile — turning those 100 looks into ~1,050 yards. Receiver B averaged 6.5 yards per target as a short-area slot player reliant on volume, converting the same 100 targets into ~650 yards. Identical opportunity, a 400-yard production gap, entirely explained by what each target was worth. And because efficiency is skill-driven and stable year-to-year (while target count swings with injuries and depth-chart moves), Receiver A is likelier to repeat his edge.
That reframes the draft decision. Efficiency and target share have to be read together: a receiver with a rising target share and stable-or-climbing yards-per-target is the strongest trending-up profile, while a high-volume slot who’s efficient only because he’s fed underneath is capped. In best ball, where ceiling matters, the manager prioritizes the high-efficiency, air-yards receiver for his spike weeks and treats the low-efficiency volume guy as the more replaceable piece — even though their raw target totals matched. The one reading only target counts overrates Receiver B; the one reading efficiency knows each of A’s targets simply does more.
Common mistake: ranking receivers by raw target count and assuming equal targets mean equal production. What each target is worth (yards per target) varies widely by role and skill and is more stable year-to-year than volume — 100 targets can yield 1,050 yards for an efficient downfield receiver or 650 for a low-efficiency slot. Read efficiency alongside target share: prize the high-target-share, high-efficiency profiles (and those trending up on both), understand that some slot receivers are efficient only within a capped short-area role, and favor the high-yards-per-target, air-yards receivers for best-ball ceiling rather than chasing target volume alone.
For how target efficiency analysis connects to best ball strategy, see our target share guide and usage trends guide. Start at the best ball hub for all resources.