Etienne is not good. He is doing the exact same thing Harris did where he is getting a ton of touches so his yardage looks good.
Also its weird how you are basing your entire theory of WRs on a very specific metric. Normally I do not mind having key metrics to judge positions but you sort of picked a bad one. Boldin was a bad WR by this metric. He obviously was not but using this metric he is. I could name several others but I figure Boldin is the one people are most familiar with.
Now WRs are not as simple for me to look at for stats. For example, for pass rushers I tend to look at push rush win rate as while sacks require you to win your matchup and then something else to happen (a QB not seeing the pressure or the coverage being good), pass rush win rate requires only that a pass rusher win his matchup so its a very clean statistic to use.
Now for WR I do not have a "golden" statistic. I do have a priority list though. First on that list is catch % as catching the ball is literally your job as WR. If you are above 70% you are likely an elite WR, or having an all pro level season, provided you are combining that with a decent YPC. Conversely if you are under 60% something is going wrong and you are not playing well. You might note that this is similar to completion % where if a QB is completing over 70% he is probably playing pretty well and under 60% poorly and in between we need to go deeper.
Now you might ask why I am going on about this and that is because Calvin Ridley is at 57% catch percentage which is simply not good enough. Fun fact by the way just to make sure I was not missing some great stat I decided to look up his projected market value, and he is sitting at around 14.5m and that already feels generous but is less impressive when you realize for where is drafted and his age he is basically getting projected to be paid the money teams are paying there WR2/WR3.
Meanwhile lets look over to Flowers. He is averaging 10.1 YPC and catching 72.1% of the balls thrown his way which is why the NFL is taking notice of him.
As someone who does pretty well betting on all these teams, certainly the past couple weeks I have been, I tend to keep track of who the good players are on each team, and what the weak units are, in order to decide on matchup problems.
Also when comparing Engram and Andrews I think it is important to distinguish the gap between being in the upper 1/3 of NFL starters at your position and being all pro. Terry McLaurin and Mike Evans are pro bowl level guys. Hill and Jefferson are all pro level guys. That is kind of gap we are talking about in terms of ability. Engram is a great player and he is a weapon you would be happy to have who can help you win. Andrews is a weapon you can win because of. That is the gap between all pro and pro bowl. Someone who can help you win versus someone who is why you win.
