Frankly I'm OK with the "bust" label for a player that's injured, because its really no different if they're injured or healthy. If they're not contributing,t he reason doesn't matter.
That being said, if people are going to use the "bust" label, it should be more resolved/permanent to me. Feels like a lot of people just use it to describe a guy who has a bad year or two, but don't really have any clue whether the guy is or will be good.
Like this fanbase went from "Queen is garbage" to "we can't trade him... he's too good" in like 6 months. Imagine what happens if Bateman is like this for 3 years, we decline his option, and then goes for 1,500 yards in year 4, and people be like "man we have to keep him no matter what".
Far cry from "he's a bust". For me, if you're labeling somebody a "bust", we should be discussing either making sure he's not on the field at all because he sucks, or making plans to have people playing over him because he's unavailable.
Pretty sure we're nowhere close to that spot for Bateman. By far the most likely outcome for me is that he's the #1 WR on this team this year.