What about a formula that set 6 points to 20 yards, then scaled the yard value gained on touchdowns by the amount of EPA gained? The EPA gained on that 1-yard TD was not very high, and not worth 20 “yards” of value.

I will say this could overvalue those 60+ yard TD runs, but given that the running back is sacrificing a ton of “first down” bonuses in “yards” gained, that could be OK.

And they can choose to run instead of pass.

If you’re going to give extra credit to wide receivers that happened to play for run first oriented teams, don’t you have to do the same for running backs who played for the inverse?

It seems to me that if you are going to infer that a running back who is getting lots of carries must be doing something right, then we must also assume that a wide receiver who is getting lots of balls thrown in their direction must also be doing something right. Yet, in your analysis of wide receivers, you tend go soft on many who’s numbers don’t stack up as just being a product of a run oriented offense. Maybe there is a reason they weren’t relied on as much by their coach that goes beyond the teams offensive philosophy