What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Grade the FBGs Analysts on ranking/predicting prospects... (1 Viewer)

B

Brewtown

Footballguy
I don't know everything/much about the track record of some of the FBGs folks. I would like people in the Shark Pool to share with all of us some history of how accurate/inaccurate they have been. Nobody is perfect (lord knows I've missed on a couple), but how have have the professionals fared... One thing that sticks out is that Lammy was all on board with Ronnie Hillman (that was a BIG MISS).

How have some of the guys here done over the years? Who do you trust? Who blows hot air???

Bloom- ???

Lammy- Hillman, but hit on Julius

Waldman- RSP seems way off the wall - how has he fared in the past with the RSP?

I look forward to some good insight.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brewtown said:
I don't know everything/much about the track record of some of the FBGs folks. I would like people in the Shark Pool to share with all of us some history of how accurate/inaccurate they have been. Nobody is perfect (lord knows I've missed on a couple), but how have have the professionals fared... One thing that sticks out is that Lammy was all on board with Ronnie Hillman (that was a BIG MISS).

How have some of the guys here done over the years? Who do you trust? Who blows hot air???

Bloom- ???

Lammy- Hillman, but hit on Julius

Waldman- RSP seems way off the wall - how has he fared in the past with the RSP?

I look forward to some good insight.
Click to expand...
The RSP is off the wall? Waldman has some of the most detailed and thorough analysis out there of rookie prospects. I suggest looking at his game analysis and breakdowns. While his rankings often differ from many of the talking heads out there, the reasoning behind them is well thought out and articulate. If I had to guess, it's probably his low ranking of your boy Sankey isn't it?

 
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
Thanks werd.

Brew - you've been here since 2004 with 800+ posts and a bunch of suspensions for instigating and fighting with other posters. You already know the answer to what you're asking. If you've got something specific to ask Matt about his RSP, ask it. Thanks.

J

 
Joe Bryant said:
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
Thanks werd.

Brew - you've been here since 2004 with 800+ posts and a bunch of suspensions for instigating and fighting with other posters. You already know the answer to what you're asking. If you've got something specific to ask Matt about his RSP, ask it. Thanks.

J
Click to expand...
Mr Bryant,I was simply trying to get a consensus idea of who really does an exceptional job of predicting prospects. I understand that this is a difficult thing to do and that nobody has a batting average of 1.000, but I was just interested in who does a really good job. I wanted to know who to have faith in. I do not have a good long-term memory other than a few flashes (Hillman/Julius) and I was just looking for some groupthink on the topic.

I bought the RSP for the first time this year and was a bit surprised at some of the rankings. This is one of the reasons that I asked the question. How has he done historically? How have others done historically? I have not tracked this and I do not know the answer to this question.

I have subscribed to footballguys since 2000 and I've referred numerous people to your site. The only reason that I have "a bunch-as you call it" suspensions (5 since 2004) is because of someone named AR who does not have an appreciation for well thought out debate. The reason that I started this thread was not for any under-handed reason. It was the selfish reason of trying to get a better understanding of who your all-stars are.

Stay classy San Diego...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brewtown said:
Joe Bryant said:
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
Thanks werd.

Brew - you've been here since 2004 with 800+ posts and a bunch of suspensions for instigating and fighting with other posters. You already know the answer to what you're asking. If you've got something specific to ask Matt about his RSP, ask it. Thanks.

J
Click to expand...
Mr Bryant,

I was simply trying to get a consensus idea of who really does an exceptional job of predicting prospects. I understand that this is a difficult thing to do and that nobody has a batting average of 1.000, but I was just interested in who does a really good job. I wanted to know who to have faith in. I do not have a good long-term memory other than a few flashes (Hillman/Julius) and I was just looking for some groupthink on the topic.

I bought the RSP for the first time this year and was a bit surprised at some of the rankings. This is one of the reasons that I asked the question. How has he done historically? How have others done historically? I have not tracked this and I do not know the answer to this question.

I have subscribed to footballguys since 2000 and I've referred numerous people to your site. The only reason that I have "a bunch-as you call it" of suspensions (5 since 2004) is because of someone named AR who does not have an appreciation for well thought out debate. The reason that I started this thread was not for any under-handed reason. It was the selfish reason of trying to get a better understanding of who you all-stars are.

Stay classy San Diego...
Click to expand...
Thanks. the link werd posted is helpful for seeing our guys and how they've done over the last few years. But the real test is reading the content for yourself as you've done. We'll miss on some for sure. I never want Footballguys to be the Average Draft Position site posting nothing but safe picks. I feel like we owe it to our readers to let them know what we think and sometimes that means going against the grain and I'm fine with that. So bottom line is we'll miss some and hopefully hit more. That's been our track record and that's what I think we can keep doing.

J

 
Brewtown said:
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
I'm looking for information on prospect projections - not so much interested in yearly projections...
Click to expand...
It would help if you asked that to start. To answer your question, Sigmund, Cecil and Matt all have outstanding reputations for identifying rookie prospects. Matt is of course the most prolific writer of that bunch creating the RSP publication that is highly respected.

J

 
Joe Bryant said:
Brewtown said:
Joe Bryant said:
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
Thanks werd.

Brew - you've been here since 2004 with 800+ posts and a bunch of suspensions for instigating and fighting with other posters. You already know the answer to what you're asking. If you've got something specific to ask Matt about his RSP, ask it. Thanks.

J
Click to expand...
Mr Bryant,I was simply trying to get a consensus idea of who really does an exceptional job of predicting prospects. I understand that this is a difficult thing to do and that nobody has a batting average of 1.000, but I was just interested in who does a really good job. I wanted to know who to have faith in. I do not have a good long-term memory other than a few flashes (Hillman/Julius) and I was just looking for some groupthink on the topic.

I bought the RSP for the first time this year and was a bit surprised at some of the rankings. This is one of the reasons that I asked the question. How has he done historically? How have others done historically? I have not tracked this and I do not know the answer to this question.

I have subscribed to footballguys since 2000 and I've referred numerous people to your site. The only reason that I have "a bunch-as you call it" of suspensions (5 since 2004) is because of someone named AR who does not have an appreciation for well thought out debate. The reason that I started this thread was not for any under-handed reason. It was the selfish reason of trying to get a better understanding of who you all-stars are.

Stay classy San Diego...
Click to expand...
Thanks. the link werd posted is helpful for seeing our guys and how they've done over the last few years. But the real test is reading the content for yourself as you've done. We'll miss on some for sure. I never want Footballguys to be the Average Draft Position site posting nothing but safe picks. I feel like we owe it to our readers to let them know what we think and sometimes that means going against the grain and I'm fine with that. So bottom line is we'll miss some and hopefully hit more. That's been our track record and that's what I think we can keep doing.

J
Click to expand...
I would agree with your sentiment. This is why I have been a long-term subscriber to Footballguys.But what I am asking about is something that is more particular than year to year average draft position success. I am interested specifically in prospect projections. This is a different skill in my opinion.

I think that if someone is going to put out their opinion on TV or in writing they should be held accountable.

What is wrong with that??

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
Brewtown said:
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
I'm looking for information on prospect projections - not so much interested in yearly projections...
Click to expand...
It would help if you asked that to start. To answer your question, Sigmund, Cecil and Matt all have outstanding reputations for identifying rookie prospects. Matt is of course the most prolific writer of that bunch creating the RSP publication that is highly respected.

J
Click to expand...
I know and understand that this is an area of focus for these guys and that they put a lot of thought into projecting/predicting prospects. I am just looking to dig a little deeper...

With all due respect - I'm really not interested in "the owner of Footballguys" opinion. I'm more interested in the unbiased discussion of the posters on this board.

 
Joe Bryant said:
Brewtown said:
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
I'm looking for information on prospect projections - not so much interested in yearly projections...
Click to expand...
It would help if you asked that to start. To answer your question, Sigmund, Cecil and Matt all have outstanding reputations for identifying rookie prospects. Matt is of course the most prolific writer of that bunch creating the RSP publication that is highly respected.

J
Click to expand...
Right. No mention of prospects in OP.

 
This is a really hard question to answer if you are simply interested in prospect evaluation across all of FBG. If the real question here is the the subtext that Joe is reading of Waldman's rankings in particular, that is probably easier to answer.

I started buying the RSP 2-3 years ago and have also purchased all of the older versions (specifically to back test accuracy). Without getting into specifics (which if you are interested in, you should buy his back issues), his track record is pretty good.

The most recent RSP had me scratching my head on a few rankings (WR in particular), but he also puts out a post-draft RSP that will be reflective of draft position so these are only a part of the puzzle. When I aggregate rookie rankings, I weight the RSP more than any other source because I know the amount of analysis that goes into it and feel comfortable with the output.

 
Waldman's RSP is great because of the level of detail it goes into. If you're knocking it because you disagree with his rankings in any year (or even every year), you're missing the point entirely. There is no other place to get multiple columns of tape analysis summary on almost every prospect.

If you want to find out his track record, just go to his site and look at the "Flashback" articles.

 
cdubz said:
This is a really hard question to answer if you are simply interested in prospect evaluation across all of FBG. If the real question here is the the subtext that Joe is reading of Waldman's rankings in particular, that is probably easier to answer.

I started buying the RSP 2-3 years ago and have also purchased all of the older versions (specifically to back test accuracy). Without getting into specifics (which if you are interested in, you should buy his back issues), his track record is pretty good.

The most recent RSP had me scratching my head on a few rankings (WR in particular), but he also puts out a post-draft RSP that will be reflective of draft position so these are only a part of the puzzle. When I aggregate rookie rankings, I weight the RSP more than any other source because I know the amount of analysis that goes into it and feel comfortable with the output.
Click to expand...
I think that may have something to do with his bolder rankings this time. He only started doing the "second" part last year (I think), so before that, his RSP had to account for probable draft position too - at least subconsciously. It's a good move to put out a post-draft one. It will account for system, opportunity, etc.

I always liked the RSP, and have bought it every year - Matt had my respect when he boldly touted Bradshaw. He was the only guy doing so.

 
thriftyrocker said:
Waldman's RSP is great because of the level of detail it goes into. If you're knocking it because you disagree with his rankings in any year (or even every year), you're missing the point entirely. There is no other place to get multiple columns of tape analysis summary on almost every prospect.

If you want to find out his track record, just go to his site and look at the "Flashback" articles.
Click to expand...
What other reason would you do rankings for?

I personally think the rankings piece is the most important part of analysis. I do not know his track record and I am very interested to hear what people in the shark pool think. I don't want to have to go and buy his old issues to find out and I don't want to read his flashback articles. I am looking to quickly get a better handle on his track record. If he has an .800 batting average over the last 5 years then maybe I put more stock into his rankings and draft Isaiah Crowell higher as a result - I also may read the entire thing. If his batting average is not that good then I want to know (it may save me some reading and future $). Plus then I may not want to read his analysis regardless of how in-depth it is (if the in-depth analysis leads to sub-par rankings then I don't want to read it and cloud my view of what I think). That is why I am asking the question.

From the sound of some of the initial responses I am not sure of his track record still. It is almost as if people are afraid to give their honest response. I guess I can see why...

 
So you bought the RSP and then are polling to see how much you should trust it? You didn't think to ask before opening your wallet?

And, as much as you've tried to hide it, this is clearly about Matt and not any other FBG staff.

ETA: :lol: at not thinking 5 suspensions is a "bunch". I've had my fair share of arguments on here with guys and have never been suspended. So, yeah, 5 is a bunch.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
doowain said:
So you bought the RSP and then are polling to see how much you should trust it? You didn't think to ask before opening your wallet?

And, as much as you've tried to hide it, this is clearly about Matt and not any other FBG staff.

ETA: :lol: at not thinking 5 suspensions is a "bunch". I've had my fair share of arguments on here with guys and have never been suspended. So, yeah, 5 is a bunch.
Click to expand...
This is not just about Matt. I also included Cecil and Sigmund in this as well (they are also very vocal about prospects). I would like to get a better consensus on their track records as well. I started reading and listening to them quite a bit recently and they often disagree - so getting a handle on their track records was also something that I was looking to get a handle on.Isn't this valuable information for a lot of people on this board? We had a thread discussing other national draft-niks and talking heads like Kiper, Mayock and Cosell...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
werdnoynek said:
Brewtown said:
I don't know everything/much about the track record of some of the FBGs folks. I would like people in the Shark Pool to share with all of us some history of how accurate/inaccurate they have been. Nobody is perfect (lord knows I've missed on a couple), but how have have the professionals fared... One thing that sticks out is that Lammy was all on board with Ronnie Hillman (that was a BIG MISS).

How have some of the guys here done over the years? Who do you trust? Who blows hot air???

Bloom- ???

Lammy- Hillman, but hit on Julius

Waldman- RSP seems way off the wall - how has he fared in the past with the RSP?

I look forward to some good insight.
Click to expand...
The RSP is off the wall? Waldman has some of the most detailed and thorough analysis out there of rookie prospects. I suggest looking at his game analysis and breakdowns. While his rankings often differ from many of the talking heads out there, the reasoning behind them is well thought out and articulate. If I had to guess, it's probably his low ranking of your boy Sankey isn't it?
Click to expand...
Opinions skewed by indirect racism

 
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.

http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
Less than 2% difference between top 20. Less than 2 predictions better or worse for every 100. Has anyone shown that the difference is statistically relevant?

I pay for the information here to make my own calls, it never occurred to me to think another human being would be any better at predicting a future largely dependent on luck and injury.

News, injuries, stats, trends, ADP/Auction info, and a few peeks at the ranking lists pre-draft to see if there is anything blatantly out of line with my own thinking. I haven't found the articles to be much use (ranging from interesting to nothing but links for the sake of links).

Use the wealth of information here to make your own crystal ball, if you are letting other people do that for you... why do it at all?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brewtown said:
doowain said:
So you bought the RSP and then are polling to see how much you should trust it? You didn't think to ask before opening your wallet?

And, as much as you've tried to hide it, this is clearly about Matt and not any other FBG staff.

ETA: :lol: at not thinking 5 suspensions is a "bunch". I've had my fair share of arguments on here with guys and have never been suspended. So, yeah, 5 is a bunch.
Click to expand...
This is not just about Matt. I also included Cecil and Sigmund in this as well (they are also very vocal about prospects). I would like to get a better consensus on their track records as well. I started reading and listening to them quite a bit recently and they often disagree - so getting a handle on their track records was also something that I was looking to get a handle on.Isn't this valuable information for a lot of people on this board? We had a thread discussing other national draft-niks and talking heads like Kiper, Mayock and Cosell...
Click to expand...
Brewtown said:
thriftyrocker said:
Waldman's RSP is great because of the level of detail it goes into. If you're knocking it because you disagree with his rankings in any year (or even every year), you're missing the point entirely. There is no other place to get multiple columns of tape analysis summary on almost every prospect.

If you want to find out his track record, just go to his site and look at the "Flashback" articles.
Click to expand...
What other reason would you do rankings for?

I personally think the rankings piece is the most important part of analysis. I do not know his track record and I am very interested to hear what people in the shark pool think. I don't want to have to go and buy his old issues to find out and I don't want to read his flashback articles. I am looking to quickly get a better handle on his track record. If he has an .800 batting average over the last 5 years then maybe I put more stock into his rankings and draft Isaiah Crowell higher as a result - I also may read the entire thing. If his batting average is not that good then I want to know (it may save me some reading and future $). Plus then I may not want to read his analysis regardless of how in-depth it is (if the in-depth analysis leads to sub-par rankings then I don't want to read it and cloud my view of what I think). That is why I am asking the question.

From the sound of some of the initial responses I am not sure of his track record still. It is almost as if people are afraid to give their honest response. I guess I can see why...
Click to expand...
Putting so much stock in rankings will get you no where at this point in the process... IMO you should be more concerned with the analysis itself because, for fantasy purposes, those rankings are going to change once we know where prospects fall and what the real football people think about them. IF you've been paying attention since '04 when you set up your account, I'd hazard to guess you should be able to start forming your own opinions on guys and come out about as good if not better than many of the people who get paid to do this. It seems to me that has already happened and now that you've seen what one of the FBG's is thinking on the apple of your eye, you wan't some reassurance. Just go with your gut.

Bravo though, bravo. Your fishing trip here has been a complete failure and I think it's time to move on.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
jwb said:
cdubz said:
This is a really hard question to answer if you are simply interested in prospect evaluation across all of FBG. If the real question here is the the subtext that Joe is reading of Waldman's rankings in particular, that is probably easier to answer.

I started buying the RSP 2-3 years ago and have also purchased all of the older versions (specifically to back test accuracy). Without getting into specifics (which if you are interested in, you should buy his back issues), his track record is pretty good.

The most recent RSP had me scratching my head on a few rankings (WR in particular), but he also puts out a post-draft RSP that will be reflective of draft position so these are only a part of the puzzle. When I aggregate rookie rankings, I weight the RSP more than any other source because I know the amount of analysis that goes into it and feel comfortable with the output.
Click to expand...
I think that may have something to do with his bolder rankings this time. He only started doing the "second" part last year (I think), so before that, his RSP had to account for probable draft position too - at least subconsciously. It's a good move to put out a post-draft one. It will account for system, opportunity, etc.

I always liked the RSP, and have bought it every year - Matt had my respect when he boldly touted Bradshaw. He was the only guy doing so.
Click to expand...
Ha! That's totally when I started paying extra attention to Waldman, although I do remember loving his stuff on fftoday, back when I was a broke ### college student who couldn't afford a subscription. Ah, memories.

 
Brewtown said:
thriftyrocker said:
Waldman's RSP is great because of the level of detail it goes into. If you're knocking it because you disagree with his rankings in any year (or even every year), you're missing the point entirely. There is no other place to get multiple columns of tape analysis summary on almost every prospect.

If you want to find out his track record, just go to his site and look at the "Flashback" articles.
Click to expand...
What other reason would you do rankings for?

I personally think the rankings piece is the most important part of analysis. I do not know his track record and I am very interested to hear what people in the shark pool think. I don't want to have to go and buy his old issues to find out and I don't want to read his flashback articles. I am looking to quickly get a better handle on his track record. If he has an .800 batting average over the last 5 years then maybe I put more stock into his rankings and draft Isaiah Crowell higher as a result - I also may read the entire thing. If his batting average is not that good then I want to know (it may save me some reading and future $). Plus then I may not want to read his analysis regardless of how in-depth it is (if the in-depth analysis leads to sub-par rankings then I don't want to read it and cloud my view of what I think). That is why I am asking the question.

From the sound of some of the initial responses I am not sure of his track record still. It is almost as if people are afraid to give their honest response. I guess I can see why...
Click to expand...
If you are just going to ignore what other people write, I don't know why you even asked the question.

jwb said:
cdubz said:
This is a really hard question to answer if you are simply interested in prospect evaluation across all of FBG. If the real question here is the the subtext that Joe is reading of Waldman's rankings in particular, that is probably easier to answer.

I started buying the RSP 2-3 years ago and have also purchased all of the older versions (specifically to back test accuracy). Without getting into specifics (which if you are interested in, you should buy his back issues), his track record is pretty good.

The most recent RSP had me scratching my head on a few rankings (WR in particular), but he also puts out a post-draft RSP that will be reflective of draft position so these are only a part of the puzzle. When I aggregate rookie rankings, I weight the RSP more than any other source because I know the amount of analysis that goes into it and feel comfortable with the output.
Click to expand...
I think that may have something to do with his bolder rankings this time. He only started doing the "second" part last year (I think), so before that, his RSP had to account for probable draft position too - at least subconsciously. It's a good move to put out a post-draft one. It will account for system, opportunity, etc.

I always liked the RSP, and have bought it every year - Matt had my respect when he boldly touted Bradshaw. He was the only guy doing so.
Click to expand...
thriftyrocker said:
Waldman's RSP is great because of the level of detail it goes into. If you're knocking it because you disagree with his rankings in any year (or even every year), you're missing the point entirely. There is no other place to get multiple columns of tape analysis summary on almost every prospect.

If you want to find out his track record, just go to his site and look at the "Flashback" articles.
Click to expand...
My apologies for trying to honestly answer your question.

 
In my world accountability is important - as are the bottom line results.

Pre-draft rankings to me are more important than rankings after the NFL draft. Pre-draft rankings are an opinion about pure talent.

Rankings are based upon your insight, your analysis, and external resources that you trust.

I started this thread to get a better understanding of who's opinions I should be valuing and trusting.

I wasn't expecting the Kim Jong-il treatment...

This is America - right?

 
Brewtown said:
Pre-draft rankings to me are more important than rankings after the NFL draft. Pre-draft rankings are an opinion about pure talent.

Rankings are based upon your insight, your analysis, and external resources that you trust.
Click to expand...
[SIZE=10.5pt]Precisely. So instead of just looking at the rankings and disagreeing with them, as myself and others have said, it's probably best to look into WHY they have a player where they do, and WHY their opinion differs from your own. To look back at the track record of any draftnick you're going to find hits and misses... sometimes people bust because of off field issues, sometimes people have success because of other's failures. Even NFL GM's, as we all know, miss on prospects. This is not an exact science where we can look at previous rankings and come to the conclusion that so-and-so is the best as what they do. I don't think there is one person out there who has the reputation of being some sort of savant when it comes to rookie prospects. The people who have the best reputations give the best analysis and insight on players. The people who can explain their thoughts clearly and concisely without a whole lot of subjectivity. IMO, if they can be articulate and thorough in their analysis of a prospect it means a whole heck of a lot more to me than someone who can guess who's going to end up the best player in the NFL. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]As a fantasy owners, I think the best thing we can do is get as much information and analysis on prospects as possible and form our own opinions. To me, this doesn't mean looking at rankings from every source imaginable and coming to a consensus or finding the analyst who's had the most success and following them like some sort of fantasy football prophet, it means using the information you have at your disposal to make the most educated and informed decisions on prospects. This is what makes dynasty leagues fun - finding the players that not everyone knows about or finding the players that you see something special with yet other people, including the people getting paid to analyze them, don't see. This is likely why most of the responses you're going to get in here are going to be that you're going about it the wrong way. Most of us enjoy forming our own opinions and not following the heard, because... this IS America. [/SIZE]

[SIZE=10.5pt]ETA: I don't appreciate you PM'ing me with your little jabs. I disagree with you and tell you why. I'm being honest and accountable. I expect the same from you as someone who values accountability so much. [/SIZE]

 
Last edited by a moderator:
MY input:

During the 2nd half of the year last season, I rode Bloom's info to a title. He was "ON" down the stretch last year and it is appreciated.

 
werdnoynek said:
Brewtown said:
Pre-draft rankings to me are more important than rankings after the NFL draft. Pre-draft rankings are an opinion about pure talent.

Rankings are based upon your insight, your analysis, and external resources that you trust.
Click to expand...
Precisely. So instead of just looking at the rankings and disagreeing with them, as myself and others have said, it's probably best to look into WHY they have a player where they do, and WHY their opinion differs from your own. To look back at the track record of any draftnick you're going to find hits and misses... sometimes people bust because of off field issues, sometimes people have success because of other's failures. Even NFL GM's, as we all know, miss on prospects. This is not an exact science where we can look at previous rankings and come to the conclusion that so-and-so is the best as what they do. I don't think there is one person out there who has the reputation of being some sort of savant when it comes to rookie prospects. The people who have the best reputations give the best analysis and insight on players. The people who can explain their thoughts clearly and concisely without a whole lot of subjectivity. IMO, if they can be articulate and thorough in their analysis of a prospect it means a whole heck of a lot more to me than someone who can guess who's going to end up the best player in the NFL.

As a fantasy owners, I think the best thing we can do is get as much information and analysis on prospects as possible and form our own opinions. To me, this doesn't mean looking at rankings from every source imaginable and coming to a consensus or finding the analyst who's had the most success and following them like some sort of fantasy football prophet, it means using the information you have at your disposal to make the most educated and informed decisions on prospects. This is what makes dynasty leagues fun - finding the players that not everyone knows about or finding the players that you see something special with yet other people, including the people getting paid to analyze them, don't see. This is likely why most of the responses you're going to get in here are going to be that you're going about it the wrong way. Most of us enjoy forming our own opinions and not following the heard, because... this IS America.

ETA: I don't appreciate you PM'ing me with your little jabs. I disagree with you and tell you why. I'm being honest and accountable. I expect the same from you as someone who values accountability so much.
Click to expand...
Some place more emphasis on their ROI and don't have the time to go through every prospect with a fine tooth comb year in and year out so they choose to follow someone else's insight. That's where the demand comes from as well as a person like yourself who wants to collect "all" of the information. No harm in either. They only thing we can do is be ahead of the masses with pickups and set efficient lineups. The scrubs I used to play in league with know what they are doing these days. You need an edge to win leagues. If I'm going to devote my money and time into your product then I'm definitely hoping you provide that edge for me over my league mates. I respect the RSP (and any FBG work) for it's well written articles, transparency and deviation from ADP. Wanting to know if its just good commentary vs accurate information that I should weigh properly is not a crime. That's not an easy task in the "information age". I've been there and cut out a lot of FF website fees in result....
 
I love those three and andrew as well. I also think just after the draft Jeff T becomes part of this esteemed group of predicting success and discussing dynasty success.

FBGs may be guilty of giving you too much information. As an individual realizes there's hundreds of prospects, there's a desire to just get to the "meat N potatoes" of some of them rather than read 2000 pages. At this point, I suggest listening to them. Go and hear their podcasts and radio shows-"horses mouth" type thing.

You can tell from their tone who they adore and who they are skeptical about-and quite frankly it's more personable than numbers that you've been staring at and studying.

Then after hearing them, re-look at some of their thoughts.

For NFL fan stuff-you want to know if your team drafted a gem.

For FF-Unless you draft before the NFL draft, what you really want is to get to the point where you're reading their stuff with the player's opportunity in mind.

By the time the season comes, these five guys are going to inform you or die trying.

I read every camp report I can and sometimes I make it a point to hit team message boards and read what fans thought viewing the practices. I abandon these five, for the most part, and am confident in my own (now informed) point of view.

You have to have your own process that includes making your own decision. Not everyone does and you can always come here mid-september to mid-october to see people blame others for their bad FF draft as if a FBG staffer actually told them who to draft and what their value was in their draft etc.

They won't draft for you or with you, you have to abandon them at some point and use your own thoughts. These threads are very grrrr for me as they generally invite the non-thinkers to come out of the woodwork. There's also plenty of valued minds in the shark pool and those that visit camps too.

What people want today is Bloom to say Watkins will have 100 receptions for 1200 yards and 13 TDs. He's totally not saying that and we're not at the point for him to project. The draft is exciting and I think that's just our usual over-anxiousness that comes with excitement.

You can't go wrong with these five informing you, you can if you pretend they draft for you

 
Brewtown said:
I don't know everything/much about the track record of some of the FBGs folks. I would like people in the Shark Pool to share with all of us some history of how accurate/inaccurate they have been. Nobody is perfect (lord knows I've missed on a couple), but how have have the professionals fared... One thing that sticks out is that Lammy was all on board with Ronnie Hillman (that was a BIG MISS).

How have some of the guys here done over the years? Who do you trust? Who blows hot air???

Bloom- ???

Lammy- Hillman, but hit on Julius

Waldman- RSP seems way off the wall - how has he fared in the past with the RSP?

I look forward to some good insight.
Click to expand...
You need to forget Hillman then. I'm sure LammEy has moved on. If you are still focused on him missing one, I doubt your mind is ready to digest all the one's he "hit" on. This isn't dating, move on already.

 
matuski said:
werdnoynek said:
Fantasy Pros has a ranking of the accuracy of industry experts. FBG's usually fare pretty well year to year.http://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/
Click to expand...
Less than 2% difference between top 20. Less than 2 predictions better or worse for every 100. Has anyone shown that the difference is statistically relevant?

I pay for the information here to make my own calls, it never occurred to me to think another human being would be any better at predicting a future largely dependent on luck and injury.

News, injuries, stats, trends, ADP/Auction info, and a few peeks at the ranking lists pre-draft to see if there is anything blatantly out of line with my own thinking. I haven't found the articles to be much use (ranging from interesting to nothing but links for the sake of links).

Use the wealth of information here to make your own crystal ball, if you are letting other people do that for you... why do it at all?
Click to expand...
:goodposting:

 
Brewtown said:
In my world accountability is important - as are the bottom line results.

Pre-draft rankings to me are more important than rankings after the NFL draft. Pre-draft rankings are an opinion about pure talent.

Rankings are based upon your insight, your analysis, and external resources that you trust.

I started this thread to get a better understanding of who's opinions I should be valuing and trusting.

I wasn't expecting the Kim Jong-il treatment...

This is America - right?
Click to expand...
There's a lot wrong here.

You're taking the first opinion(FBG folks) and asking us(4th sentence) our opinion of how your opinion should be shaped.

Kim Jong comment won't make you friends here.

Your-Predraft rankings are more important than rankings after the draft because it's about pure talent, is not useful nor accurate.

Within the NFL draft, teams are drafting based upon need not necessarily is every pick solely about talent.

For FF, the greatest hidden talent at WR that is 5th on the depth chart is nowhere near as useful as the RB that was signed off the street and is suddenly getting playing time because four RBs have been injured this year for that team. FF is about opportunity, moreso than most admit around draft time but come May or June that reality sets in again. Consider if the Pats made a draft day trade to select Johnny football and how his dynasty value would drop being stuck as Brady's backup or Rodgers' or Brees' etc.

Most glaring is the lack of original thought by you. Their job, and role in your life if you visit the site, is to inform.

 
Brewtown said:
thriftyrocker said:
Waldman's RSP is great because of the level of detail it goes into. If you're knocking it because you disagree with his rankings in any year (or even every year), you're missing the point entirely. There is no other place to get multiple columns of tape analysis summary on almost every prospect.

If you want to find out his track record, just go to his site and look at the "Flashback" articles.
Click to expand...
What other reason would you do rankings for?

I personally think the rankings piece is the most important part of analysis. I do not know his track record and I am very interested to hear what people in the shark pool think. I don't want to have to go and buy his old issues to find out and I don't want to read his flashback articles. I am looking to quickly get a better handle on his track record. If he has an .800 batting average over the last 5 years then maybe I put more stock into his rankings and draft Isaiah Crowell higher as a result - I also may read the entire thing. If his batting average is not that good then I want to know (it may save me some reading and future $). Plus then I may not want to read his analysis regardless of how in-depth it is (if the in-depth analysis leads to sub-par rankings then I don't want to read it and cloud my view of what I think). That is why I am asking the question.

From the sound of some of the initial responses I am not sure of his track record still. It is almost as if people are afraid to give their honest response. I guess I can see why...
Click to expand...
doowain said:
And, as much as you've tried to hide it, this is clearly about Matt and not any other FBG staff.
Click to expand...
 
Shutout said:
MY input:

During the 2nd half of the year last season, I rode Bloom's info to a title. He was "ON" down the stretch last year and it is appreciated.
Click to expand...
I always wonder why people play this game yet rely on others to make the decisions for them like the "Who do I start" questions. Those are the worst. I use analysts for information, but any of their rankings and point of view is subjective to us all. When they provide info I value that much more then when they provide "What they think." Its why following the teams beat writer is the best way to gather info.

I read something on mock drafts about how the analysts very rarely if ever get them accurate. Same for fantasy ranking, everyone has the typical rankings and most do rankings based of others rankings so they don't get ridicule. Whats the point of others rankings anyways?

I do my own ranking and follow those based off the info I gather. If a tough decision comes I go looking for info not a rankings lists to see who has who rated higher.

To be fair, looking at ADP is the best way to gather info, see how they are being drafted that is the best ranking system.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bri said:
Brewtown said:
In my world accountability is important - as are the bottom line results.

Pre-draft rankings to me are more important than rankings after the NFL draft. Pre-draft rankings are an opinion about pure talent.

Rankings are based upon your insight, your analysis, and external resources that you trust.

I started this thread to get a better understanding of who's opinions I should be valuing and trusting.

I wasn't expecting the Kim Jong-il treatment...

This is America - right?
Click to expand...
There's a lot wrong here.You're taking the first opinion(FBG folks) and asking us(4th sentence) our opinion of how your opinion should be shaped.

Kim Jong comment won't make you friends here.

Your-Predraft rankings are more important than rankings after the draft because it's about pure talent, is not useful nor accurate.

Within the NFL draft, teams are drafting based upon need not necessarily is every pick solely about talent.

For FF, the greatest hidden talent at WR that is 5th on the depth chart is nowhere near as useful as the RB that was signed off the street and is suddenly getting playing time because four RBs have been injured this year for that team. FF is about opportunity, moreso than most admit around draft time but come May or June that reality sets in again. Consider if the Pats made a draft day trade to select Johnny football and how his dynasty value would drop being stuck as Brady's backup or Rodgers' or Brees' etc.

Most glaring is the lack of original thought by you. Their job, and role in your life if you visit the site, is to inform.
Click to expand...
I am not asking how my opinion should be shaped (I know how I shape mine). I am simply trying to get an idea of who's opinion I maybe should value more so than another. I do take some element of expert analysis into putting together my ranking of prospects. I put less weight into situation and I try to focus on talent when drafting in my dynasty leagues - which is why I put a lot of weight/thought into pre-draft rankings.

I understand that it is their job to inform. Simply trying to get an idea of who to trust more...

 
False Start said:
Shutout said:
MY input:

During the 2nd half of the year last season, I rode Bloom's info to a title. He was "ON" down the stretch last year and it is appreciated.
Click to expand...
I always wonder why people play this game yet rely on others to make the decisions for them like the "Who do I start" questions. Those are the worst. I use analysts for information, but any of their rankings and point of view is subjective to us all. When they provide info I value that much more then when they provide "What they think." Its why following the teams beat writer is the best way to gather info.

I read something on mock drafts about how the analysts very rarely if ever get them accurate. Same for fantasy ranking, everyone has the typical rankings and most do rankings based of others rankings so they don't get ridicule. Whats the point of others rankings anyways?

I do my own ranking and follow those based off the info I gather. If a tough decision comes I go looking for info not a rankings lists to see who has who rated higher.

To be fair, looking at ADP is the best way to gather info, see how they are being drafted that is the best ranking system.
Click to expand...
Did it ever occur to you that some of us realize we have a weakness with WDIS questions and for that reason look to the opinions of those considered experts to help us? For instance, I actually did dynasty rankings for a period of years for two now defunct FF websites, but at that time I avoided advising people on WDIS because that is not my strong suit.

Now I don't just plug in someone's rankings - I first take a stab at setting my lineups but then fine tune them after comparing my choices to people like Dodds and Bloom (who seem have a far better grasp of ranking starters in individual games than I do).

Bravo for you that you feel your own analysis is equal to anyone's as far WDIS is concerned. Unlike you, that is a weakness in my game and I don't feel I am among "the worst" here because I use the opinions of others to guide me (and am in black overall in my dynasty leagues over the last decade).

 
Footballguys analysts Pre-Draft Running Back takes (from On The Counch dated 4-16-14)....

LAMMEY

He says only 3 RBs from this class have Star Potential: Tre Mason, Isaiah Crowell, and Jeremy Hill

He thinks the 2013 class of Rookie RBs are better than this class (2014)

He likes Jeremy Hill over Carlos Hyde

Says Andre Williams is not special

Says Seastrunk is not a full time back

Doesn't like Terrence West

Likes Devonta Freeman

Doesn't like McKinnon

Says Bishop Sankey is not special/not creative and is a part-time player (says he has a little Ronnie Hillman in him who he liked)

Likes Tre Mason (compares him to Thurman Thomas and Ray Rice)

Likes Kadeem Carey and called him a starter in the making

Likes Charles Simms and Storm Johnson - say they could both be lead backs in a committee

Doesn't like Grice

Likes Kapri Bibbs but says he is a part time player who needs a lot of carries

BLOOM

Says he is not very excited about this RB class (says class will produce only 1-2 starters, but many contributors)

He likes Hyde slightly better than Hill

Like Crowell quite a bit

Doesn't like Andre Williams

He likes Seastrunk, but not as a lead back (only a committee back)

He likes Freeman

He says he is very lukewarm on Bishop Sankey - says he is adequate and not special - a backup RB in the NFL

Likes Tre Mason but not as much as Lammey

Likes and thinks very highly of KaDeem Carey

Thinks Charles Simms is decent

Likes Storm Johnson

 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's probably pretty rare for any site to keep track of rookie predictions. I think a site like Walterfootball or here probably archives their old articles or mocks. You could go back and see who they "hit and miss" on.

This is kind of hard to determine though until the players are 3-4 years into their careers.

Even then, what metrics do you use to judge the players by? Pro bowls? Starts?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ramblin Wreck said:
That's an awful lot of likes for a class that supposedly stinks
Click to expand...
If you listened to the podcasts, Lammey says "I like him, I just don't love him" sometimes. It's hard to understand where the line is between those qualitative values and quantitative fantasy values that we peasants use. I think that's a way of hedging, so there's no way of nailing down actual right/wrong forecasts on players.

 
MoveToSkypager said:
Ramblin Wreck said:
That's an awful lot of likes for a class that supposedly stinks
Click to expand...
If you listened to the podcasts, Lammey says "I like him, I just don't love him" sometimes. It's hard to understand where the line is between those qualitative values and quantitative fantasy values that we peasants use. I think that's a way of hedging, so there's no way of nailing down actual right/wrong forecasts on players.
Click to expand...
This. Listening to the podcast last night, Lammey also qualified everything at the beginning with a comment something along the lines of "Last year's RB class was average, and this year's class makes that one look good". I think there is an understanding among many pundits that this RB class isn't that good, so that context is important when considering "likes".

ETA: went back to try to transcribe the actual quote given attention to the language, as far as I can tell, it is: "Last year's class was an average class and it is way better than this year's class"

 
Last edited by a moderator:
cdubz said:
MoveToSkypager said:
Ramblin Wreck said:
That's an awful lot of likes for a class that supposedly stinks
Click to expand...
If you listened to the podcasts, Lammey says "I like him, I just don't love him" sometimes. It's hard to understand where the line is between those qualitative values and quantitative fantasy values that we peasants use. I think that's a way of hedging, so there's no way of nailing down actual right/wrong forecasts on players.
Click to expand...
This. Listening to the podcast last night, Lammey also qualified everything at the beginning with a comment something along the lines of "Last year's RB class was average, and this year's class makes that one look good". I think there is an understanding among many pundits that this RB class isn't that good, so that context is important when considering "likes".
Click to expand...
I still don't get the knock on last year's RB class. Take this into consideration:

  • the top two RBs in last year's rookie drafts are currently valued as Top 5 dynasty RBs (Bernard and Lacy).
  • three RBs finished in the Top 15 in RB scoring in PPR leagues (Lacy #8, Bernard #13, Bell #15, and Stacy was #9 from Week 5 on - when he got the starting job)
  • Montee Ball
  • we have two more highly valued backups who should see a spike in playing time this year and have RB1 upside (Lattimore and C.Michael)
How is that average?

 
doowain said:
cdubz said:
MoveToSkypager said:
Ramblin Wreck said:
That's an awful lot of likes for a class that supposedly stinks
Click to expand...
If you listened to the podcasts, Lammey says "I like him, I just don't love him" sometimes. It's hard to understand where the line is between those qualitative values and quantitative fantasy values that we peasants use. I think that's a way of hedging, so there's no way of nailing down actual right/wrong forecasts on players.
Click to expand...
This. Listening to the podcast last night, Lammey also qualified everything at the beginning with a comment something along the lines of "Last year's RB class was average, and this year's class makes that one look good". I think there is an understanding among many pundits that this RB class isn't that good, so that context is important when considering "likes".
Click to expand...
I still don't get the knock on last year's RB class. Take this into consideration:

  • the top two RBs in last year's rookie drafts are currently valued as Top 5 dynasty RBs (Bernard and Lacy).
  • three RBs finished in the Top 15 in RB scoring in PPR leagues (Lacy #8, Bernard #13, Bell #15, and Stacy was #9 from Week 5 on - when he got the starting job)
  • Montee Ball
  • we have two more highly valued backups who should see a spike in playing time this year and have RB1 upside (Lattimore and C.Michael)
How is that average?
Click to expand...
All of that is looking at results, which on a retrospective basis makes sense and I agree. I think some of the lofty dynasty rankings are due to a lot of starters being up there in age - but overall that class was huge hit.

I think what he is saying is that on a pre-draft evaluation basis, last year's class was considered average. That matches up with what I was hearing last year.

 
cdubz said:
doowain said:
cdubz said:
MoveToSkypager said:
Ramblin Wreck said:
That's an awful lot of likes for a class that supposedly stinks
Click to expand...
If you listened to the podcasts, Lammey says "I like him, I just don't love him" sometimes. It's hard to understand where the line is between those qualitative values and quantitative fantasy values that we peasants use. I think that's a way of hedging, so there's no way of nailing down actual right/wrong forecasts on players.
Click to expand...
This. Listening to the podcast last night, Lammey also qualified everything at the beginning with a comment something along the lines of "Last year's RB class was average, and this year's class makes that one look good". I think there is an understanding among many pundits that this RB class isn't that good, so that context is important when considering "likes".
Click to expand...
I still don't get the knock on last year's RB class. Take this into consideration:

  • the top two RBs in last year's rookie drafts are currently valued as Top 5 dynasty RBs (Bernard and Lacy).
  • three RBs finished in the Top 15 in RB scoring in PPR leagues (Lacy #8, Bernard #13, Bell #15, and Stacy was #9 from Week 5 on - when he got the starting job)
  • Montee Ball
  • we have two more highly valued backups who should see a spike in playing time this year and have RB1 upside (Lattimore and C.Michael)
How is that average?
Click to expand...
All of that is looking at results, which on a retrospective basis makes sense and I agree. I think some of the lofty dynasty rankings are due to a lot of starters being up there in age - but overall that class was huge hit.

I think what he is saying is that on a pre-draft evaluation basis, last year's class was considered average. That matches up with what I was hearing last year.
Click to expand...
Ah, ok. That sentence didn't read that way. Makes more sense now.

"Last year's RB class was average, and this year's class makes that one look good".
Click to expand...
 
This response is not related to player projections, but I'll respond anyway.

I use every expert on this site to help create an FBG consensus belief on value, and I compare that to the outside experts to develop a list of value picks based on the difference; FBG vs. Outside consensus. I've used this to deliver top 3 finishes 85% of the time since i joined in 2003. It's as if the majority of outsiders just rehash the same info that ESPN or CBS is spitting out which helps me beat the majority of my league mates year in & year out. A few guys on Yahoo & DynastyLeagueFootball get it right more than not so I lump them into the FBG consensus as well.

I can't say anyone guy is better than another because I compile all data to develop a consensus. This often causes me to miss on the sleepers (outliers), but for every sleeper, there are 10 snoozers, so i'll take my consensus every-time.

This probably is inherently opposite of what you intended to find out, but i'd like to make the case that group think is not all that bad, when the group your following is better than the other guys group. Works for me!

 
I am a long time FBG subscriber. I havehad a fair am ount of success in this hobby. I use all of their content to guide my own decision making. I don't have the time to do a retrospective analysis of the individual contributers' offerings.

What FBG's offers is different than a handicapping service to help me win betting on games against the spread.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

dschuler
DSchuler’s QB Change Probability: 4 new starters, more on the way? Packers accumulate draft assets, Cardinals back in play for #1 pick
2 3
Replies
103
Views
5K
Long Ball Larry
Long Ball Larry
T
2023 Rookies - Who are the best route runners?
Replies
29
Views
3K
Gatorade
Gatorade
Hot Sauce Guy
My Experience With NFC Rotowire Online Championship Leagues
Replies
11
Views
897
Hot Sauce Guy
Hot Sauce Guy

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top