Analyzing Players (1 Viewer)

Now's the time a lot of people are looking ahead at future possibilities for many players.

Allow me to kick off the discussion on how / what to look for or at when you want to try and figure out what the future may hold for a given player.

1. Recent performance - How did he do in the most recent year? Seems obvious, but you have to start there. Did he perform well or bad, and why?

2. Skillset - Somewhat falls out of #1, but if a player underperformed and it feels fluky (like Witten last year), maybe he is a value next season.



3. Supporting cast - Did the QB situation cost him (Steve Smith owners)? Was the O-line good or bad? Were there eight in the box every down?



4. Age / milestones / "the wall" - Did the player cross over 30 years old? If a RB, does he have 2500 career touches or is he over 31? Did a rookie hit the "rookie wall" about Week 12?



Then comes off the field issues:

1. Coaching - Did the game plan philosophy change (a la LaMont Jordan being a mess last year after a head coach change)? Did Mike Martz move to town? Norv Turner?



2. Salary information - Was he in a contract year? RFA/UFA? Where will he land if he moves on?

3. Draft day implications - Is there flesh blood in town at his position? Is it a long term threat (like Kevin Kolb) or will it impact this year (Chester Taylor)?

I'm sure there are more factors, but that's some of what comes to mind.

Here are two links to use for Salary Cap Info:

NFLPA Player Salary Info (No Bonuses)

USA Today - Salary Info

Nothing to add yet.

If you're strictly talking dynasty then I look at the following factors:

Draft position - Draft position is an important data point for judging the merits of an untested young player. In general, the earlier a player was taken in the draft, the better his odds of becoming a useful FF player. Guys like Chad Johnson, Justin Fargas, LenDale White, Roddy White, Ladell Betts, Maurice Drew, Frank Gore, and Bernard Berrian didn't come out of nowhere. They were all early draft picks. Underhyped 1st-3rd year first day NFL draft picks are among the best dynasty investments you can make because these players often have starter talent at backup prices.

Some guys to consider targeting this offseason: Aaron Rodgers, Brady Quinn, Kevin Kolb, Drew Stanton, Trent Edwards, Kenny Irons, DeAngelo Williams, Chris Perry, Ted Ginn, Robert Meachem, Dwayne Jarrett, Steve Smith (NYG), Jason Hill, Laurent Robinson, Mike Walker, Johnnie Lee Higgins. All of these guys were early draft picks. None of them are expensive. Most of them will never amount to much, but I can pretty much guarantee you that two or three of these guys will be valuable players in the near future. It happens EVERY year. The trick is deciding who's for real and who's trash.

Past performance - One of the areas where many FF owners make mistakes is by adopting a "what have you done for me lately" attitude with their rankings. This leads to impatience with prospects, undervaluing of good players coming off bad seasons, and overvaluing of bad players coming off fluke seasons.

Instead of basing your future rankings on the 2007 season, you should try to look at the big picture. Consider someone like Donovan McNabb. Right now he's ranked below Vince Young and Derek Anderson in the dynasty QB rankings. Does anyone in the world really think either of those guys is better than McNabb? Do not sleep on star players just because they had a rough year.

On the flipside, a player who is having an uncharacteristic monster season will almost certainly be overrated. TJ Houshmandzadeh is my poster boy for this phenomenon right now. He is 30 years old. Prior to this season, he had never eclipsed 1,100 receiving yards or had double digit receiving TDs in a season. Nevertheless, he's currently ranked ahead of studs like Anquan Boldin, Torry Holt, Chad Johnson, and Terrell Owens in the staff rankings. Tisk tisk. TJ is the perfect example of a "good but not great" player being overrated on the basis of a fluke season. When those targets and TDs come down, he will be exposed for the WR2 he really is and people who paid this year's price for last year's numbers will be left holding the bag like they were with Santana Moss and Chris Chambers.

The general rule of thumb is this: a guy playing above his head is due for a fall. A guy playing below his head is due for a rise. This rule works best with veterans since they have a long track record of production. Obvious exceptions must be made for old players on the brink of hitting the wall (for example, I'm more optimistic that Mark Clayton will bounce back than I am that Marvin Harrison will do the same).

EBF said:

Instead of basing your future rankings on the 2007 season, you should try to look at the big picture. Consider someone like Donovan McNabb. Right now he's ranked below Vince Young and Derek Anderson in the dynasty QB rankings. Does anyone in the world really think either of those guys is better than McNabb? Do not sleep on star players just because they had a rough year.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the reminder.Not much change in mine, but I bumped them to today.

This is going to be a great thread. Nothing to add yet.

I think one thing to look for in potentially emerging players is what their respective teams do in the draft and/or free agency with regards to their position. Does a team like GB draft another RB which might make you think twice about Grant. Maybe a team like CAR or CHI makes a move for D. Anderson etc. and forces us to rethink our valuations on new teammates like S. Smith or Berrian. I for one am not sold on V. Davis in SF because of their inconsistent QB play. But maybe they boost their WRs and take some heat off of him and bingo, you get a top 5 TE for great value. I always look forward to the off-season search for that diamond in the rough. Great thread.

EBF said:

If you're strictly talking dynasty then I look at the following factors:

Draft position - Draft position is an important data point for judging the merits of an untested young player. In general, the earlier a player was taken in the draft, the better his odds of becoming a useful FF player.

Click to expand...

This is sage advice and I wish it would have sunk in before I traded MJD (dynasty) this preseason.

League Tendencies/Same Position Quality

For TEs,

How is Gates affected by

# of TE increasing production, Witten, Winslow, Gonzo...& declines Heap...for relative value.

Cover 2 higher use

Plus supporting cast:

Chambers/Tomlinson reception part of the pie

QB play

Will you wait on TE due to later options improving or scarcity due to declines

You have to consider injuries and off season surgeries as well. And remember that each player and each injury is different. It's best to see how a guy actually plays and compare it to where he was if possible. For some reason many people forgot that McNabb was coming off a serious injury prior to this season, however they remembered that last year he was having a MVP caliber year before he got hurt. Serious injuries not only mess with a player's body, but they can also mess with the mind. Certain players don't handle mental aspects that well. Everyone wants to think that players are going to comeback like Carson Palmer and/or Terrell Owens, but they are the exception rather than the rule. Another injury to take note of is concussions and head/neck injuries. These are the type of things that can make seemingly fearless players very timid, not to mention the likelihood that setbacks and repeat injury will occur. You will run into plenty of problems with these players being unstartable because of questionable status or just being ruled out. You want to avoid those headaches as much as possible.

I think it's a mistake to use age as a big indicator for everyone, although considering RB age may not be a bad idea because it actually holds rather true as being a wall for a majority of running backs. QBs and WRs and other positions can play well after 30 and perform great. It's more important to get information on how the player is taking care of his body. You have to actually look at the player and see if they are getting fat or in some cases too skinny with age. Some players lose a step with age, and others retain their speed like Joey Galloway, so you have to see them play and see what kind of shape they are in. Some players don't rely heavily on speed so losing a step isn't going to change their game much. I would also consider where the player's mindset is at, not just in the way he plays but also in regards to possible distractions away from the field. Is he thinking of retiring every year? Is that affecting him negatively, or is the closing window motivating him? It's hard to know this stuff, you usually have to get good video interviews and have an ability to read people. Players will usually give up the cliche when questioned, however that is not always the case and you will get elaboration and thought from some players. Reading people is complicated, but most people have some ability to read general body language. The tricky part is determining what you saw and what that means, without falling into the traps of seeing what you want to see or being blind to certain things. This happens a lot with people and "their" teams. You will notice that a fan can't always think clearly because they want their guys to do well and think they will despite other factors not supporting this, they are acting on faith. On the other end of the spectrum you have fans who dislike players on "their" own teams for whatever reasons and they will avoid seeing the value in them because it reflects poorly on them. It's just too hard for them to admit that they were wrong about a player, that's called having an ego problem. So a good way to avoid these problems is to be totally honest with yourself. If you spend time evaluating players, you will be wrong about plenty of players. I recommend not being a fan of any 1 team, but this is not practical for many people.

All of this evaluation comes after having a good handle on the basics. You have to understand the fundamentals of football. The best fantasy football resources available are probably books and videos about fundamentals. Coaching style books that teach you the fundamental truths about football, both scheme dynamics as well as positional intricacies. It is very important to watch actual games, but you have to know what you are looking for. Understanding hand placement for offensive lineman may seem unimportant, but it will make all the difference in the world when you have to chose between 2 RBs in similar situations. If you have some knowledge and can see that one team has flaws that some savvy veteran playing against them is going to exploit you can make better decisions. Think about it, every year most fantasy football players buy a magazine or website subscription and for the most part the information is all the same. Most people don't want to go out on limbs, so rankings get generalized as some sort of compromise. The people who do go out on limbs are the ones I pay attention to, because they are either smart or dumb and evaluating their picks can tell you what the case is rather quickly. The pundits that don't want to stray far from the general consensus aren't going to provide much value either. Instead of paying for the opinions of these people, you can pay for the material presented by football coaches and learn more and more each year about actual football. The Internet has leveled the playing field in regards to most of the injury information and statistical analysis and it is reflected in these general rankings, the edge will go to those who can actually evaluate players objectively while seeing the big picture of how they fit into overall game plans as they relate to 22 dynamic players on the field at once. It's a lot of work and you do need a genuine love of the game to put in this kind of work.

The key is HOW you go about looking for all the things mentioned in this thread. I advise looking to yourself first. Are you getting drunk on Sunday while trying to evaluate games? It's clear that this impairs your judgment and ability to evaluate players and teams. Are you trying to watch a game, but constantly find yourself on edge and distracted because you are so worried about what is going on in your fantasy football match up? Are you missing plays because you are glued to your laptop or are you watching the ticker across the bottom closer than the players on the field? These are terrible habits and you have to change your approach. This is just part of the discipline that it takes to analyze players properly. There is so much more that goes into it, I barely even touched on evaluating the competitive mindset, toughness, and other intangibles that can make all the difference. The fundamental base has to be there before that kind of advanced analysis can be done.

Great Thread guys! Excellent essay DinkinFlcka.

Jeff Pasquino said:

3. Supporting cast - Did the QB situation cost him (Steve Smith owners)? Was the O-line good or bad? Were there eight in the box every down?

Click to expand...

how did the player do with new supporting cast members and will those new cast members stay for another season?Just as one example.

Does Shaun Hill start next year?

If so, he was a top 12 QB in the last 3 weeks, can he keep that up?

Vernon Davis was a top 5 TE with Hill, is that simply because Hill couldn't throw to the WRs? Or is VD going to be a top 5 next year?

Arnaz Battle was worthless during Hill's starts

Darrell Jackson was also bad

Key changes like that are vital to track, we can't just assume a star player will succeed with another good QB. See Javon Walker.

:white corner:

Anyone got that link to 2008 free agents?? TIA

Not enough discussion is made of offensive players who play for teams with weak defenses. Unless it's the 2006 Colts offense you're talking about, if the offense is playing from behind, the rushing opportunities drop off and the passing opportunities are greatly hurt by the fact that the defense can get pressure and force turnovers. The best offensive players tend to come from teams that can run the full offense for more of the game because their defense is holding up its end of things.

massraider said:

:white corner:

Anyone got that link to 2008 free agents?? TIA

Click to expand...

From around a month agohttp://www.profootballweekly.com/PFW/Featu...ositionlist.htm

redman said:

Not enough discussion is made of offensive players who play for teams with weak defenses. Unless it's the 2006 Colts offense you're talking about, if the offense is playing from behind, the rushing opportunities drop off and the passing opportunities are greatly hurt by the fact that the defense can get pressure and force turnovers. The best offensive players tend to come from teams that can run the full offense for more of the game because their defense is holding up its end of things.

Click to expand...

While I think there is truth to this, especialy for the running game, there are a lot of examples that are the exact opposite.The late 1990s to early 2000s Vikings and Rams offenses for example. Bengals and Saints offenses last year. The Browns this year.Looking at the abilities of an offensive line and the defense as well as team philosophy is important to consider when looking at running games however.Vikings, Bears, Titans Jaguars and Giants for example.I don't think Ward, Droughns and Jacobs are that much better than Benson/Thomas Jones. But their offensive line sure is. And while Eli may not be even above average as a QB in the league he makes a defense a lot more honest than Jackson or Rex/Griese do.

Biabreakable said:

redman said:

Not enough discussion is made of offensive players who play for teams with weak defenses. Unless it's the 2006 Colts offense you're talking about, if the offense is playing from behind, the rushing opportunities drop off and the passing opportunities are greatly hurt by the fact that the defense can get pressure and force turnovers. The best offensive players tend to come from teams that can run the full offense for more of the game because their defense is holding up its end of things.

Click to expand...

While I think there is truth to this, especialy for the running game, there are a lot of examples that are the exact opposite.The late 1990s to early 2000s Vikings and Rams offenses for example. Bengals and Saints offenses last year. The Browns this year.Looking at the abilities of an offensive line and the defense as well as team philosophy is important to consider when looking at running games however.Vikings, Bears, Titans Jaguars and Giants for example.I don't think Ward, Droughns and Jacobs are that much better than Benson/Thomas Jones. But their offensive line sure is. And while Eli may not be even above average as a QB in the league he makes a defense a lot more honest than Jackson or Rex/Griese do.

Click to expand...

You're definitely correct on that. I said it too strongly about the passing game. One key thing to look for is the offensive line. If you have a weak offensive line and a bad defense, the QB is going to take a beating when his team's down, and not going to get those garbage yards like some QB's will.

Will try to add something later

EBF said:

If you're strictly talking dynasty then I look at the following factors:

Draft position - Draft position is an important data point for judging the merits of an untested young player. In general, the earlier a player was taken in the draft, the better his odds of becoming a useful FF player. Guys like Chad Johnson, Justin Fargas, LenDale White, Roddy White, Ladell Betts, Maurice Drew, Frank Gore, and Bernard Berrian didn't come out of nowhere. They were all early draft picks. Underhyped 1st-3rd year first day NFL draft picks are among the best dynasty investments you can make because these players often have starter talent at backup prices.

Click to expand...

Key point bolded. Once we get past year three or so, you can throw draft position out. Also, while I like EBF's take here - use high draft position as an indicator of untapped potential, however, I would still trust your eyes before draft position - Cedric Benson being the best example here. Yes, he was a top 5 pick, but he had shown little heart running the ball, and just did not seem like a hungry player. I also would not automatically believe that low draft position is a sign of a fluke - Marques Colston is the perfect example here - if you watched him at all, you saw that he was for real last year, not a fluke in any way shape or form - so in that case, it was almost better to completely forget what his draft position was. In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Seconding Coaching

More so than the head coach though, is the hiring of position coaches (Offensive Coordinator, new QB Coach, new RB Coach, etc.)

As we saw with Jason Garrett in Dallas, anybody who followed his hiring knew that A] He was a backup to Aikman during the glory years and B] Said he would be going back to that kind of offensive style. I grabbed Witten and Owens because I remembered how effective Novacek and Irvin were under the Dallas system of the mid-90's and felt that a return to that style could have benefits to both in those positions.

It's also helpful to figure out (if possible) to try and find the tendencies of an offensive coordinator, if he's newly hired. Did he have college positions prior? NFL experience? What were his playcalling tendencies at his previous places (Conservative vs. Aggressive)? Did he lean towards the run or the pass?

Same can be said for defensive coordinators in IDP leagues.

As an understudy to Weis (who would use spread formations in NE), I thought Daniels would also utilize some spread formations (not to this extent of course) and wasn't surprised when the Patriots began running 4 and 5 WR sets. I also noticed in the Dolphins game that the Dolphins also began running 4 and 5 WR sets. Could be something to look for next season in relation to the WRs or QB.

Sigmund Bloom said:

In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Bloom here.With all of the different schools getting better at the college level, it seems that there are better and better programs developing across the country. That means the talent is getting more spread out and that the same 30-40 programs aren't as dominant as they once were. Sure, the USCs and Ohio States will always be competitive, but there are a lot of Div I-AA, II and III players that can come "out of nowhere" and contribute. The list is getting longer each year of undrafted and small school talents that contribute to the NFL teams.NFL player career lengths average around 4 years, but with the salary cap and free agency the rookies and 2nd year players are asked to contribute more and earlier (beyond special teams). That's why learning the players that get drafted and also are making noise in training camp are important. Younger players are impacting the league more now as older veterans become cap casualties.

DawnBTVS said:

Seconding Coaching

More so than the head coach though, is the hiring of position coaches (Offensive Coordinator, new QB Coach, new RB Coach, etc.)

As we saw with Jason Garrett in Dallas, anybody who followed his hiring knew that A] He was a backup to Aikman during the glory years and B] Said he would be going back to that kind of offensive style. I grabbed Witten and Owens because I remembered how effective Novacek and Irvin were under the Dallas system of the mid-90's and felt that a return to that style could have benefits to both in those positions.

It's also helpful to figure out (if possible) to try and find the tendencies of an offensive coordinator, if he's newly hired. Did he have college positions prior? NFL experience? What were his playcalling tendencies at his previous places (Conservative vs. Aggressive)? Did he lean towards the run or the pass?

Same can be said for defensive coordinators in IDP leagues.

As an understudy to Weis (who would use spread formations in NE), I thought Daniels would also utilize some spread formations (not to this extent of course) and wasn't surprised when the Patriots began running 4 and 5 WR sets. I also noticed in the Dolphins game that the Dolphins also began running 4 and 5 WR sets. Could be something to look for next season in relation to the WRs or QB.

Click to expand...

Along the line of coaches, pay attention to who coaches like. If you are constantly reading that a certain coach likes a specific player or style of player, the guy in question will get an opportunity to fail even if you don't see it what the coaches see.

Jeff Pasquino said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Bloom here.With all of the different schools getting better at the college level, it seems that there are better and better programs developing across the country. That means the talent is getting more spread out and that the same 30-40 programs aren't as dominant as they once were. Sure, the USCs and Ohio States will always be competitive, but there are a lot of Div I-AA, II and III players that can come "out of nowhere" and contribute. The list is getting longer each year of undrafted and small school talents that contribute to the NFL teams.NFL player career lengths average around 4 years, but with the salary cap and free agency the rookies and 2nd year players are asked to contribute more and earlier (beyond special teams). That's why learning the players that get drafted and also are making noise in training camp are important. Younger players are impacting the league more now as older veterans become cap casualties.

Click to expand...

I will only trust that trend when the salaries of draft picks (and therefore the financial committment by teams to those players) levels out more than it is. Until then, it will only be natural for a team to root harder for a more expensive early round pick to succeed than for a cheaper, later round pick.

redman said:

Jeff Pasquino said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Bloom here.With all of the different schools getting better at the college level, it seems that there are better and better programs developing across the country. That means the talent is getting more spread out and that the same 30-40 programs aren't as dominant as they once were. Sure, the USCs and Ohio States will always be competitive, but there are a lot of Div I-AA, II and III players that can come "out of nowhere" and contribute. The list is getting longer each year of undrafted and small school talents that contribute to the NFL teams.NFL player career lengths average around 4 years, but with the salary cap and free agency the rookies and 2nd year players are asked to contribute more and earlier (beyond special teams). That's why learning the players that get drafted and also are making noise in training camp are important. Younger players are impacting the league more now as older veterans become cap casualties.

Click to expand...

I will only trust that trend when the salaries of draft picks (and therefore the financial committment by teams to those players) levels out more than it is. Until then, it will only be natural for a team to root harder for a more expensive early round pick to succeed than for a cheaper, later round pick.

Click to expand...

I think you're correct in pointing out that higher draft position will continue to correlate with increased opportunity - I do not doubt that - still, I dont think draft position will be as good an indicator of who will actually capitalize on that opportunity as it was in the past.

Jeff Pasquino said:

...2. Salary information - Was he in a contract year? RFA/UFA? Where will he land if he moves on?...

Click to expand...

There are some things that just seem to make common sense to us. Like that some players are just more consistent than others, so past consistency should be a meaningful predictor of future consistency. Or that some players are injury prone, that past injuries are a meaningful predictor of future injuries. But when we take a rigorous look at those topics and put the conventional wisdom to the test versus reality, we've found the CW was wrong and that we shouldn't make decisions based on those beliefs. The "contract year" is one of those things that I think is in need of seeing whether the conventional wisdom is correct or not. I wouldn't at all be surprised at a result that players are not more likely to have a significant increase in production in a contract year than they are in a non-contract year. I also wouldn't be surprised if the conventional wisdom is confirmed, either. Like consistency and injury-prone, I think we just don't know at this point. We can think of examples but the existence of examples don't prove it's an actual trend worth predicting on.I think this is an opportunity for some FBG staffer to do an excellent article.

Sigmund Bloom said:

EBF said:

If you're strictly talking dynasty then I look at the following factors:

Draft position - Draft position is an important data point for judging the merits of an untested young player. In general, the earlier a player was taken in the draft, the better his odds of becoming a useful FF player. Guys like Chad Johnson, Justin Fargas, LenDale White, Roddy White, Ladell Betts, Maurice Drew, Frank Gore, and Bernard Berrian didn't come out of nowhere. They were all early draft picks. Underhyped 1st-3rd year first day NFL draft picks are among the best dynasty investments you can make because these players often have starter talent at backup prices.

Click to expand...

Key point bolded. Once we get past year three or so, you can throw draft position out. Also, while I like EBF's take here - use high draft position as an indicator of untapped potential, however, I would still trust your eyes before draft position - Cedric Benson being the best example here. Yes, he was a top 5 pick, but he had shown little heart running the ball, and just did not seem like a hungry player. I also would not automatically believe that low draft position is a sign of a fluke - Marques Colston is the perfect example here - if you watched him at all, you saw that he was for real last year, not a fluke in any way shape or form - so in that case, it was almost better to completely forget what his draft position was. In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

For every M. Colston who showed in his rookie year that he was no fluke, there is a Michael Clayton who looked equally as studly and then proceeded to fall off the map. The irony is that going into year 2 for Clayton, he was a sure-fire stud because you could back it up with his draft position. It just leads me to the truth that there are no certainties in football, especially dynasty fantasy football, you just have to hit more times than you miss and hope for the best!

Jeff Pasquino said:

Then comes off the field issues:

1. Coaching - Did the game plan philosophy change (a la LaMont Jordan being a mess last year after a head coach change)? Did Mike Martz move to town? Norv Turner?

Click to expand...

For instance, is the coach a COMPLETE IDIOT as seen below:Miami Dolphins HC Cam Cameron said Monday that he's sticking with QB Cleo Lemon for the season finale, because he gives, "us the best chance to win," Cameron said. Many had thought that since Miami has already secured the first pick in the draft that rookie QB John Beck would be allowed to start, but that is not the case here.

Win what? He may want to update that resume.

Does this idiot even realize Parcells is now his boss?

Sigmund Bloom said:

redman said:

Jeff Pasquino said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Bloom here.With all of the different schools getting better at the college level, it seems that there are better and better programs developing across the country. That means the talent is getting more spread out and that the same 30-40 programs aren't as dominant as they once were. Sure, the USCs and Ohio States will always be competitive, but there are a lot of Div I-AA, II and III players that can come "out of nowhere" and contribute. The list is getting longer each year of undrafted and small school talents that contribute to the NFL teams.NFL player career lengths average around 4 years, but with the salary cap and free agency the rookies and 2nd year players are asked to contribute more and earlier (beyond special teams). That's why learning the players that get drafted and also are making noise in training camp are important. Younger players are impacting the league more now as older veterans become cap casualties.

Click to expand...

I will only trust that trend when the salaries of draft picks (and therefore the financial committment by teams to those players) levels out more than it is. Until then, it will only be natural for a team to root harder for a more expensive early round pick to succeed than for a cheaper, later round pick.

Click to expand...

I think you're correct in pointing out that higher draft position will continue to correlate with increased opportunity - I do not doubt that - still, I dont think draft position will be as good an indicator of who will actually capitalize on that opportunity as it was in the past.

Click to expand...

Given the college talent distribution trend, don't you think NFL talent scouts will throw the evaluation net a little broader as to not miss the next Colston or do you think teams will still shy away from small school guys on the first day?

I like to look at reasons past studs didn't repeat. Is it injuries(Harrison), coaching changes(Gore), one year wonder(M. Clayton), losses in FA or retirements(LJ, even though he was injured too). Here is what I just wrote in F&L's thread. Even if you don't agree, this is what I like to think about for past studs to see if they are a buy low or sell on name while you can:

On 85, I think he is a hold right now unless you can get close in value. As was mentioned earlier, his name may get you that trade, unless your league thinks the same way. At this moment, I wouldn't take low value for him, but I may by the end of the offseason.

I can still see his talent on the field this year, but Palmer and the Bengals offense looked horrible and couldn't get him the ball, and they didn't have much of a running game to keep balance. I am going to keep a close eye on their offseason moves this year. If they get some help in their run d so teams can't keep Palmer off the field, and some O-line help (its obvious looking at CLE that Steinbech made a huge difference) I think 85 will be back to top-3 numbers. Remember Chad likes to get deep, and TJ runs shorter routes. If the line can't allow Chad to get deep than he has to go to TJ, which is what I credit a lot of this year to.

On the other hand, if Cincy doesn't get help on both lines, I will try to move Chad during the summer even if I have to take a hit in value.

.

even w/ all the information available today w/ coaches, improving offensive lines, defenses, etc etc, there's only so much you can really analyze w/ that stuff. after going through every team, it seems like there's so much upside w/ everyone!

after the key players that perform great year in year out, the pedigrees if you will(i.e. tomlinson, westbrook, peyton, etc), there is a crop of players that get taken way too early every year, and a bunch that overperform their draft value. it's those players that you need to figure out.

when i look at what Lee Evans did this year(drafted him in 3 of 4 leagues), he's someone that screams to me next year that he'll be undervalued...and as much as he screwed me this year, i'll be targeting him next year in the mid rounds. it's nailing a couple of those picks that will put you over the top.

Brewzers said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

redman said:

Jeff Pasquino said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Bloom here.With all of the different schools getting better at the college level, it seems that there are better and better programs developing across the country. That means the talent is getting more spread out and that the same 30-40 programs aren't as dominant as they once were. Sure, the USCs and Ohio States will always be competitive, but there are a lot of Div I-AA, II and III players that can come "out of nowhere" and contribute. The list is getting longer each year of undrafted and small school talents that contribute to the NFL teams.NFL player career lengths average around 4 years, but with the salary cap and free agency the rookies and 2nd year players are asked to contribute more and earlier (beyond special teams). That's why learning the players that get drafted and also are making noise in training camp are important. Younger players are impacting the league more now as older veterans become cap casualties.

Click to expand...

I will only trust that trend when the salaries of draft picks (and therefore the financial committment by teams to those players) levels out more than it is. Until then, it will only be natural for a team to root harder for a more expensive early round pick to succeed than for a cheaper, later round pick.

Click to expand...

I think you're correct in pointing out that higher draft position will continue to correlate with increased opportunity - I do not doubt that - still, I dont think draft position will be as good an indicator of who will actually capitalize on that opportunity as it was in the past.

Click to expand...

Given the college talent distribution trend, don't you think NFL talent scouts will throw the evaluation net a little broader as to not miss the next Colston or do you think teams will still shy away from small school guys on the first day?

Click to expand...

They will/are, as evidenced by Jacoby Jones going in the early 3rd last year despite playing in D2 - but the scouting departments are still catching up.

Sigmund Bloom said:

Brewzers said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

redman said:

Jeff Pasquino said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Bloom here.With all of the different schools getting better at the college level, it seems that there are better and better programs developing across the country. That means the talent is getting more spread out and that the same 30-40 programs aren't as dominant as they once were. Sure, the USCs and Ohio States will always be competitive, but there are a lot of Div I-AA, II and III players that can come "out of nowhere" and contribute. The list is getting longer each year of undrafted and small school talents that contribute to the NFL teams.NFL player career lengths average around 4 years, but with the salary cap and free agency the rookies and 2nd year players are asked to contribute more and earlier (beyond special teams). That's why learning the players that get drafted and also are making noise in training camp are important. Younger players are impacting the league more now as older veterans become cap casualties.

Click to expand...

I will only trust that trend when the salaries of draft picks (and therefore the financial committment by teams to those players) levels out more than it is. Until then, it will only be natural for a team to root harder for a more expensive early round pick to succeed than for a cheaper, later round pick.

Click to expand...

I think you're correct in pointing out that higher draft position will continue to correlate with increased opportunity - I do not doubt that - still, I dont think draft position will be as good an indicator of who will actually capitalize on that opportunity as it was in the past.

Click to expand...

Given the college talent distribution trend, don't you think NFL talent scouts will throw the evaluation net a little broader as to not miss the next Colston or do you think teams will still shy away from small school guys on the first day?

Click to expand...

They will/are, as evidenced by Jacoby Jones going in the early 3rd last year despite playing in D2 - but the scouting departments are still catching up.

Click to expand...

First day draft picks tend to succeed much more often than second day draft picks. Even with the success of guys like Colston and Marshall, I don't see that pattern changing a whole lot. Everyone remembers that those guys succeeded despite being taken pretty low in the draft, but what about Roddy White, Dwayne Bowe, Santonio Holmes, Greg Jennings, Maurice Drew, Joseph Addai, and Braylon Edwards? Lots of early draft picks have emerged as playmakers over the same time period. Draft position is by no means a perfect indicator of a player's prospects, but I do think it's an important factor to consider since it's a reflection of what the professional scouts think of a player's abilities. If all you did in your rookie drafts is select the highest NFL draft pick who isn't a QB at each of your picks, you'd probably make out okay in the long run. That said, I agree that the eyeball test is important. Even in the first three rounds the success rate is something like 55%, 20%, and 15%. There are always going to be busts, so it's important to be able to look at guys like Williamson, M. Jones, and Benson and understand why they failed.

:goodtopic:

The problem with using draft position to determine value is that you have to know who is picking the guy and what makes him tick in addition to what makes the actual player tick. Busts happen all the time, and sleepers awaken as well. Some teams will draft a guy based on roster needs, other teams will take a guy that plays a position they have filled because he's the best talent out there and/or the players available at position of need are evaluated to be bad players. There is some merit to using draft position to guide you, teams are going to take a guy and pay him a bundle if they don't plan on using him. Note the contract and how the money is allocated, because they can cut guys at anytime and the base and bonus numbers make a huge difference. That can help you gauge if they really believe in a guy or just want to believe. It still comes down to proper evaluation and NFL teams mess up all the time. So to play this game you really have to establish a baseline and see what teams are evaluating players well and which aren't. It can come down to some teams can predict one position well and another horribly. ie - Ravens can draft anything except QB. That's an overly simple example, but the idea is there. There are situations that arise like the Lions taking Calvin Johnson despite other needs. For one thing he graded out to be an elite talent. Another aspect to consider is that the Lions feel Roy's heart is still in Texas and he'll be leaving the Lions as soon as he can, so the Calvin Johnson pick was made with that in mind despite the draft busts of Rogers and M. Williams. It's not hard to tell that CJ has real potential, I'm just putting the idea out there that many things play into decisions that may look odd at first glance because you don't always know where the heads in that war room are at.

DinkinFlicka said:

The problem with using draft position to determine value is that you have to know who is picking the guy and what makes him tick in addition to what makes the actual player tick. Busts happen all the time, and sleepers awaken as well. Some teams will draft a guy based on roster needs, other teams will take a guy that plays a position they have filled because he's the best talent out there and/or the players available at position of need are evaluated to be bad players. There is some merit to using draft position to guide you, teams are going to take a guy and pay him a bundle if they don't plan on using him. Note the contract and how the money is allocated, because they can cut guys at anytime and the base and bonus numbers make a huge difference. That can help you gauge if they really believe in a guy or just want to believe. It still comes down to proper evaluation and NFL teams mess up all the time. So to play this game you really have to establish a baseline and see what teams are evaluating players well and which aren't. It can come down to some teams can predict one position well and another horribly. ie - Ravens can draft anything except QB. That's an overly simple example, but the idea is there. There are situations that arise like the Lions taking Calvin Johnson despite other needs. For one thing he graded out to be an elite talent. Another aspect to consider is that the Lions feel Roy's heart is still in Texas and he'll be leaving the Lions as soon as he can, so the Calvin Johnson pick was made with that in mind despite the draft busts of Rogers and M. Williams. It's not hard to tell that CJ has real potential, I'm just putting the idea out there that many things play into decisions that may look odd at first glance because you don't always know where the heads in that war room are at.

Click to expand...

A few thoughts:1. The thing about draft position is this:It's an indisputable fact that the higher a player is chosen, the better his odds of succeeding.Studies have shown that players chosen in the following draft rounds have a success rate along the lines of:First Round - 50-60%Second Round - 30-35%Third Round - 20-30%Fourth Round - 5-10%Everyone remembers that Marques Colston was a 7th round pick. But you know what? Andre Johnson, Torry Holt, Randy Moss, Braylon Edwards, and Larry Fitzgerald were all 1st round picks. Higher picks succeed more often than lower picks. Just because it doesn't make an interesting pre-game story on the NFL morning shows doesn't mean it isn't true. So if it's late in your dynasty draft and there are a handful of unproven prospects available, you might be wise to take whichever one was chosen highest by the NFL. That strategy would probably serve you pretty well in the long run. 2. I definitely think you're on to something when you mention that certain teams are better at scouting talent than others. I put more stock in a player if a good front office like Indianapolis, Pittsburgh, or New England drafts him than if a bad front office like Oakland, St. Louis, or Cincinnati drafts him. But there's a problem with making rules like "avoid Baltimore QBs" and "avoid Browns RBs." Each player is a unique event and should be treated accordingly. Once upon a time we had the following rules:- Avoid Chargers RBs. - Avoid Steelers QBs. - Avoid Patriots WRs. You see where I'm going with this? Just because a team like Chicago has a poor track record with offensive talent doesn't mean they aren't going to land the next elite RB and WR in the 2008 draft. You just can't get too caught up in a team's past. Even a blind squirrel finds a nut sometimes and one lucky draft pick can help change a team's fortunes completely (the Patriots have done a great job in the draft, but getting Brady in the 6th was a lucky break). Also, front offices are always in flux. A few years ago Cleveland was one of the worst drafting teams in the league. They've been doing better the last few seasons now that they have a new regime. My unwillingness to place heavy emphasis on a team's scouting performance as a predictor of prospect success might seem like a contradiction compared with my willingness to place heavy emphasis on draft position as a predictor of prospect success. It's not. There's an important distinction here:In any given draft in any given year, teams will always try to take the best players first. This is static. It's always been this way and it will always be this way. So I have no problem using draft position data to predict the future. The best players will, on average, always be drafted early. However...The Chicago Bears front office is not a static entity. Just because they sucked at picking offensive talent from 2000-2007 doesn't mean they'll always suck at picking offensive talent. For all we know this might be the year when they finally turn the corner and start building an offensive juggernaut. So basically we can use draft position to predict prospect success because the best players will always be taken early, but we should be more reluctant to use front office quality as a predictor of prospect success because the quality of a team's front office is flexible and cannot be relied on in the long-term.

EBF said:

Studies have shown that players chosen in the following draft rounds have a success rate along the lines of:First Round - 50-60%Second Round - 30-35%Third Round - 20-30%Fourth Round - 5-10%

Click to expand...

Certainly studies have proven that, but the two questions/issues raised earlier in the thread are:1) How much of that success can be attributed to salary structure [ie] higher draft pick = higher salary/investment = greater opportunity to play? 2) Given the more balanced distribution of talent at the college level (especially small schools & div II), NFL teams can get talented players later in the draft. This could jeopardize the value/weight we currently place on draft position and flatten out the success curve you quote above. Its all good thought provoking stuff. I don't have the capacity nor desire to watch and evaluate all those players. I'm sure glad we got Bloom, Lamey and others to do that!

Brewzers said:

EBF said:

Studies have shown that players chosen in the following draft rounds have a success rate along the lines of:First Round - 50-60%Second Round - 30-35%Third Round - 20-30%Fourth Round - 5-10%

Click to expand...

Certainly studies have proven that, but the two questions/issues raised earlier in the thread are:1) How much of that success can be attributed to salary structure [ie] higher draft pick = higher salary/investment = greater opportunity to play? 2) Given the more balanced distribution of talent at the college level (especially small schools & div II), NFL teams can get talented players later in the draft. This could jeopardize the value/weight we currently place on draft position and flatten out the success curve you quote above. Its all good thought provoking stuff. I don't have the capacity nor desire to watch and evaluate all those players. I'm sure glad we got Bloom, Lamey and others to do that!

Click to expand...

2) may be happening, but if 1) doesn't change then you're left with essentially the same result: players taken earlier will have a greater investment in their success and teams will give them more opportunities to succeed before discarding them.

Brewzers said:

1) How much of that success can be attributed to salary structure [ie] higher draft pick = higher salary/investment = greater opportunity to play?

Click to expand...

Relatively little, IMO.High draft picks get easier and earlier opportunities than low draft picks, but whether or not a player ultimately succeeds depends entirely on his abilities. It's not like there are Pro Bowl caliber WRs sitting on the bench because they were low draft picks. Coaches aren't stupid. They try to play their best players.

2) Given the more balanced distribution of talent at the college level (especially small schools & div II), NFL teams can get talented players later in the draft.

Click to expand...

It really doesn't work that way. Talent is completely RELATIVE.So this notion that the draft is somehow "deeper" than it used to be is completely misguided. The number of elite players in the NFL is and always will be relatively static. That's because there's no definition of an elite player aside from how he compares to his fellow players. So becoming an elite player isn't a matter of achieving some objective aptitude. It's merely a matter of being better than the average pro player. Even if the average pro player is better than he was in the past, that doesn't mean the average pro player is an elite player. It just means that the average elite player is also better than he was in the past. The number of viable players entering the NFL is no greater than it was thirty years ago. And most of those guys are still coming from BCS programs and being taken in the first three rounds. The best example I can use is to compare it to the college admissions process. An elite school like Harvard accepts about 10% of its applicants in a given year. Over the past decade or two the average GPA and SAT scores of Harvard applicants has increased. But guess what? Harvard still accepts only about 10% of that pool. So even though the pool itself has gotten stronger, the number of "elite" students has remained about the same. Same deal in the draft. A given draft will only produce 30-50 quality NFL starters. That number will only change if the league expands and adds more teams.

Sigmund Bloom said:

EBF said:

If you're strictly talking dynasty then I look at the following factors:

Draft position - Draft position is an important data point for judging the merits of an untested young player. In general, the earlier a player was taken in the draft, the better his odds of becoming a useful FF player. Guys like Chad Johnson, Justin Fargas, LenDale White, Roddy White, Ladell Betts, Maurice Drew, Frank Gore, and Bernard Berrian didn't come out of nowhere. They were all early draft picks. Underhyped 1st-3rd year first day NFL draft picks are among the best dynasty investments you can make because these players often have starter talent at backup prices.

Click to expand...

Key point bolded. Once we get past year three or so, you can throw draft position out. Also, while I like EBF's take here - use high draft position as an indicator of untapped potential, however, I would still trust your eyes before draft position - Cedric Benson being the best example here. Yes, he was a top 5 pick, but he had shown little heart running the ball, and just did not seem like a hungry player. I also would not automatically believe that low draft position is a sign of a fluke - Marques Colston is the perfect example here - if you watched him at all, you saw that he was for real last year, not a fluke in any way shape or form - so in that case, it was almost better to completely forget what his draft position was. In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

Just wanted to pimp the study I did for NFLDraftGuys on this topic. Linky

ConstruxBoy said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

EBF said:

If you're strictly talking dynasty then I look at the following factors:

Draft position - Draft position is an important data point for judging the merits of an untested young player. In general, the earlier a player was taken in the draft, the better his odds of becoming a useful FF player. Guys like Chad Johnson, Justin Fargas, LenDale White, Roddy White, Ladell Betts, Maurice Drew, Frank Gore, and Bernard Berrian didn't come out of nowhere. They were all early draft picks. Underhyped 1st-3rd year first day NFL draft picks are among the best dynasty investments you can make because these players often have starter talent at backup prices.

Click to expand...

Key point bolded. Once we get past year three or so, you can throw draft position out. Also, while I like EBF's take here - use high draft position as an indicator of untapped potential, however, I would still trust your eyes before draft position - Cedric Benson being the best example here. Yes, he was a top 5 pick, but he had shown little heart running the ball, and just did not seem like a hungry player. I also would not automatically believe that low draft position is a sign of a fluke - Marques Colston is the perfect example here - if you watched him at all, you saw that he was for real last year, not a fluke in any way shape or form - so in that case, it was almost better to completely forget what his draft position was. In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

Just wanted to pimp the study I did for NFLDraftGuys on this topic. Linky

Click to expand...

good job, John

EBF said:

2) Given the more balanced distribution of talent at the college level (especially small schools & div II), NFL teams can get talented players later in the draft.

Click to expand...

It really doesn't work that way. The number of viable players entering the NFL is no greater than it was thirty years ago. And most of those guys are still coming from BCS programs and being taken in the first three rounds.

Click to expand...

EBF, I think you're wrong here. College coaches and programs at every level are doing a much better job of preparing kids for the pros than they used to. The complexity of the systems and quality of the coaches gets better every year, and will continue to get better. You are right that most of the elite players are coming from BCS programs and the first three rounds, but that majority shrinks every year.Look at the pro bowl rosters through the lens of your two criteria - half of the QBs were 6th round/undrafted (Romo, Hasselbeck, Brady), and Romo went to a small school, at RB half fall into one or the other - you have a 3rd rounder from Villanova (Westbrook), a 4th rounder (Barber), and undrafted (Parker), at WR, its 3 out of 8 - you have a small school 7th (Driver), a small school 3rd (Owens), and a 7th rounder (Housh)

Sigmund Bloom said:

EBF said:

2) Given the more balanced distribution of talent at the college level (especially small schools & div II), NFL teams can get talented players later in the draft.

Click to expand...

It really doesn't work that way. The number of viable players entering the NFL is no greater than it was thirty years ago. And most of those guys are still coming from BCS programs and being taken in the first three rounds.

Click to expand...

EBF, I think you're wrong here. College coaches and programs at every level are doing a much better job of preparing kids for the pros than they used to. The complexity of the systems and quality of the coaches gets better every year, and will continue to get better. You are right that most of the elite players are coming from BCS programs and the first three rounds, but that majority shrinks every year.Look at the pro bowl rosters through the lens of your two criteria - half of the QBs were 6th round/undrafted (Romo, Hasselbeck, Brady), and Romo went to a small school, at RB half fall into one or the other - you have a 3rd rounder from Villanova (Westbrook), a 4th rounder (Barber), and undrafted (Parker), at WR, its 3 out of 8 - you have a small school 7th (Driver), a small school 3rd (Owens), and a 7th rounder (Housh)

Click to expand...

I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but it's the exception and not the rule. I don't think that's changed at all in the past few years and I don't see it changing at all moving forward. The overwhelming majority of starting NFL RBs went to BCS schools and were taken in the first three rounds of the draft. I only count a handful of starters who don't fit both of those criteria (Rudi, Westbrook, Barber, Grant, Parker, and maybe Graham if you want to count him). All in all, that's a pretty small percentage. There seem to more late round/small school starters at WR than at RB, but the pattern still holds true. 15 of the top 20 WRs in my PPR league were first day draft picks. Some of those guys went to small schools (Owens, Curtis, Jennings), but they were early picks all the same. QB is a slightly different beast since it's a harder position to project and the bust rate is a little bit higher. I'm a little more open-minded towards late round QBs than I am WRs and RBs because the NFL seems to have a harder time evaluating QBs than they do WRs and RBs. Neverthless, for every Romo and Brady there are guys like Peyton, Roethlisberger, McNabb, and Palmer. 24 of 32 opening day starters were first day draft picks. It's the same story at TE. Gonzo, Witten, Shockey, Heap, Crumpler, Cooley, and Winslow were all first day draft picks. Gates is the only elite TE to "come out of nowhere." There are always going to be guys like Jerry Rice and Walter Payton coming out small schools. But for the most part, the prospect talent pool is monopolized by division one schools from BCS conferences. As long as those schools continue to have their pick of the litter, they're going to produce more pro players than their competitors. Most of those players who go on to successful careers will be taken on the first day of the draft.

Sigmund Bloom said:

redman said:

Jeff Pasquino said:

Sigmund Bloom said:

In general, I think we're going to see a trend that draft position is going to be a less and less reliable indicator of future success.

Click to expand...

I tend to agree with Bloom here.With all of the different schools getting better at the college level, it seems that there are better and better programs developing across the country. That means the talent is getting more spread out and that the same 30-40 programs aren't as dominant as they once were. Sure, the USCs and Ohio States will always be competitive, but there are a lot of Div I-AA, II and III players that can come "out of nowhere" and contribute. The list is getting longer each year of undrafted and small school talents that contribute to the NFL teams.NFL player career lengths average around 4 years, but with the salary cap and free agency the rookies and 2nd year players are asked to contribute more and earlier (beyond special teams). That's why learning the players that get drafted and also are making noise in training camp are important. Younger players are impacting the league more now as older veterans become cap casualties.

Click to expand...

I will only trust that trend when the salaries of draft picks (and therefore the financial committment by teams to those players) levels out more than it is. Until then, it will only be natural for a team to root harder for a more expensive early round pick to succeed than for a cheaper, later round pick.

Click to expand...

I think you're correct in pointing out that higher draft position will continue to correlate with increased opportunity - I do not doubt that - still, I dont think draft position will be as good an indicator of who will actually capitalize on that opportunity as it was in the past.

Click to expand...

In other words don't waste time reading scouting reports from guys like you and Jeff or listening to the Audible. That was partly in jest, but the point is that NFL teams are spending huges sums on sorting this out and acting accordingly. The info "you" bring us problably rivals what most scouting departments did a decade ago. Their job may be harder but I think you're grossly under estimating the ability of the NFL to adapt. Actually with the increased coverage of smaller schools and more developing programs rising up the ranks, there should be more exposure of the talent pool.

I honestly just look at certain stats and gut feelings for the most part. It seems to work pretty well for emerging WRs, but RBs can pop up out of nowhere. You have to assume the starter will go down and then choose his heir apparent - and guess correctly. The key I think here is to choose a good offensive team's backup. You'll notice that guys like Ryan Grant and Earnest Graham did well, but guys like Lorenzo Booker or Jesse Chatman or Kolby Smith did not necessarily hit pay dirt. This bodes well for Najeh Davenport in the playoffs for Pittsburgh. Good team's backups seem to thrive even with their starting RB out.

For every Brandon Marshall there's also a Vincent Jackson. Both were very close in ADP at the beginning of the season. Both San Diego and Denver have good offenses, so I guess we also have to look at how potent each team's running game is, not to mention the Gates factor in San Diego. Would Marshall have had such a dominant season if Javon Walker didn't get hurt though? That, we'll never know.

Another thing I look at is buzz factor - What are other people saying about a certain player? I remember being a little gun shy on Braylon Edwards, simply because Celveland's offense was far from potent in 2006. But, after listening to the grapevine of other people's opinions, I began to really warm up to him. There seems to be a few players like this every year that I'm able to hit.

While nobody can be 100% correct on every player, when a good % of people you trust seem to agree, things tend to come true. Not all the time, but more often than not.

just my to add