Welcome to our now 86-part “Does It Matter?” series dedicated to finding out which metrics matter for fantasy football production. In this part, we’re tackling a specific measurable for Tight Ends: Hand Size. Intuitively, it makes sense: bigger hands should equal a better catch radius and more reliable receptions, leading to more fantasy points. But does the data back this up? We number-crunched over two decades of fantasy football results to determine if hand size can predict future success, how much it really matters, and if there’s an ideal benchmark fantasy managers should look for. Let’s dive in.
To test the correlation, we analyzed the top 50 PPR fantasy finishers at the tight end position every season since 2003. We then compared the elite producers (the Top 10) against the low-end starters (the “Bottom 10,” referring to those finishing 41st-50th).
Why the top 50? We needed to find a “happy medium.” Analyzing only the top 20 or 30 finishers might prevail too similar of fantasy finishers without distinct differences since all are relatively successful players. Conversely, expanding the dataset to the top 100 would include fringe roster players and those who are likely to score minimal points, which would only skew the data. Our goal was to compare the best against the worst, meaning we needed a sample of players who were consistently on rosters but performed significantly worse than the Top 10. The 41st-50th place finishers represented this baseline perfectly, allowing us to isolate the metrics that separate elite producers from the rest.
Our first step was to create an averages chart comparing the hand sizes of different finishing tiers: Top 10, 11th-30th, and 31st-50th. If bigger hands were a key to success, we would expect to see the Top 5 or 10 finishers consistently posting larger hand sizes than the 31st-50th group. The data showed the exact opposite. No clear trend emerged where larger hand sizes correlated with higher fantasy scores. In fact, in 12 of the 21 seasons analyzed (57.1%), the top 5 fantasy finishers actually had a smaller average hand size than the 31st-50th place finishers. This finding directly undermines the “bigger is better” theory.
To be certain, we tried a different approach. We charted every Top 10 finisher since 2003 and segmented them into 1/8” rounded hand size “buckets.” This would show us if a specific hand size (e.g., 10 1/8″) produced more elite seasons than another (e.g., 9 1/2″). Once again, no trend appeared. The distribution of elite finishers was spread widely across the spectrum, making it look more like high-end fantasy scores were not dependent on a specific hand size.
Despite the lack of an obvious trend, we wanted to find if any subtle, applicable threshold existed that has historically signaled top-level consistency. We were looking for a range that minimized the appearance of unique, outlier players and instead showcased consistent performers.
To do this, we made a “differences chart” which compares each hand size (plus the next 1/8”) and subtracts the percentage of Bottom 10 finishers from the percentage of Top 10 finishers within that group. The chart’s desired outcome is a negative number for unique differences (Orange) and a positive number for non-unique differences (Blue). From this, it appeared as though 10.125” and above could be a possible top-performing range, getting us closer to a potential optimal range.
With a potential range in sight, we made quick range adjustments in our spreadsheet to ensure we identified the highest-producing range. After testing various numbers close to the range our differences chart showed, we found a clear winner. Altering this range to 10.5” and above produces an 11.7% higher Top 10 appearance rate than in the Bottom 10. Therefore, if you are looking for any edge, this is the optimal range you should hope for in your favorite athletes and will also be included in our Ultimate Athlete Blueprints which offers an easy-to-read table housing all of our researched metrics combined in one place for you to view as seen here:
Due to these findings, Hand Sizes could play a factor in our Star-Predictor Score (SPS) model. The Star-Predictor Score (SPS) is a scouting tool designed to maximize investment potential and reduce risks when drafting rookies in Fantasy Football. It is proven to have a higher accuracy than draft capital alone to predict fantasy football success. The SPS includes 13 to 17 metrics, with the exact number varying by the player’s position. All these metrics are pre-NFL, and some are invented by us, providing a complete analysis of a player’s analytical profile. The SPS gained widespread notoriety for its high accuracy, having made it on Barstool and The Pat McAfee Show. The SPS can be found here, and future projected SPS grades can be unlocked here.
While we identified an “optimal range,” we had to apply standard statistical analysis to test hand size’s true correlation.
This value shows an extremely weak positive correlation between hand sizes and future fantasy production. A value this close to 0 suggests that while we can find a small range (10.5″+) that appears more often in the Top 10, the relationship is not statistically significant and holds very little predictive power. When studying world-class athletes as we are, a Pearson value greater than 0.1 (or less than -0.1) is considered significant. For context, the accompanying Pearson value for QB draft capital – a metric everyone acknowledges matters in prospect scouting – prevailed a -0.219 Pearson value.
Next, we compared decades to spot recent trends and see how significant our TE hand size optimal range is for the Top 10, 11-40th place finishers, and Bottom 10. From the decadal differences chart, you can see that this “optimal range” is actually a decreasing trend in the most recent decade, suggesting it is becoming even less of a factor over time.
| 2004-2013 | |||
| Top 10 | 11 through 40 | Bottom 10 | |
| All count | 72 | 202 | 69 |
| All 10.5” and above | 12 | 10 | 0 |
| % (Optimal Range/all) | 16.7% | 5.0% | 0.0% |
| 2014-2023 | |||
| Top 10 | 11 through 40 | Bottom 10 | |
| All count | 77 | 215 | 62 |
| All 10.5” and above | 20 | 25 | 12 |
| % (Optimal Range/all) | 26.0% | 11.6% | 19.4% |
Based on our analysis of over two decades of data, a tight end’s hand size has little to no predictive value for fantasy football success. While our deeper analysis did identify a small “optimal range” of 10.5″ and above, our statistical tests confirm this finding is not significant. A Pearson value of 0.04 and a decreasing trend show that this metric is not a reliable predictor. If you still do want to use it in your scouting process, you should look for athletes with a hand size of 10.5″ and above.
Our series has always sought to push the boundaries of sports analytics. This latest installment reaffirms our commitment to uncovering the hidden dynamics that define the game. Every Saturday, we’ll dive into intriguing questions, bust myths, and settle debates with thorough analysis. We welcome your input. Therefore, please leave comments or reach out with topics you’re eager to see dissected. All of our research can be found on our Analytics Page. Up next on our agenda for Part 87 of “Does It Matter?” is an examination of Tight End Wingspans: Do They Matter? If so, what’s the draft age threshold necessary for NFL success? Mark your calendars; every Saturday we shed light on the topics that matter to you. All it takes is a quick question being asked and we will go to work for you!
BrainyBallers Buy-Hold-Sell Chart (All Players)
Get Your Products 100% Refunded By Predicting The Next SuperBowl Winner!
In the 90th installment of our “Does It Matter?” series, we are looking specifically at the Tight End position. For the metric
To view this content including projected future SPS grades, you must be a Premium BrainyBallers member. You can see details of the
In Part 89 of our “Does It Matter?” series, we crunched the numbers to determine if a Tight End’s College Drop Rate
