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.

FBG Dynasty Rankings? (1 Viewer)

Milkman

Milkman

Footballguy
I'll just preface this with I love the site. It's the best FF site on the web hands down but what's up with the dynasty rankings? I only see one set in the last 35 days. I'm assuming they are really time consuming but isn't there a lot of staff on the FBG that do them? Or is there only a couple? Admittedly I'm pretty ignorant to how many people do them and how hard they are to do but it would be nice to see every staff member that is involved with them update their rankings every month. Lots of people use them for trades and I like to identify players I think are under/overvalued on FBG's rankings and exploit that to make deals. :D

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree!  I have to go to other sites to also find the new status of ranking movement for both dynasty and redraft.  The 200 forward here at least to me seems loosely based on the up coming matches and not the actual over all true positioning.  I have used other sites and my own knowledge for both of these types of rankings for the last 10 years. I'm actually surprised FBG doesn't do a better job in this area.

 
I tend to use the dynasty player value charts by Harstad and The dynasty trade value chart by Hindery. They are published every other week (Harstad on even # weeks, Hindery on odd # weeks) in the weekly content, usually towards the end of each week. Much more valuable info than just the typical rankings fbgs put out.

 
mcd said:
I tend to use the dynasty player value charts by Harstad and The dynasty trade value chart by Hindery. They are published every other week (Harstad on even # weeks, Hindery on odd # weeks) in the weekly content, usually towards the end of each week. Much more valuable info than just the typical rankings fbgs put out.
Click to expand...
Harstad & Hindery are putting out things that are better than rankings, but unfortunately this means that FBG's dynasty-ranking-like content is spread across 3 different places. It would be nice to be able to see their rankings alongside Tefertiller's and Simpkins's on the dynasty rankings page, and then have the option of clicking through for their more detailed value charts.

 
ZWK said:
Harstad & Hindery are putting out things that are better than rankings, but unfortunately this means that FBG's dynasty-ranking-like content is spread across 3 different places. It would be nice to be able to see their rankings alongside Tefertiller's and Simpkins's on the dynasty rankings page, and then have the option of clicking through for their more detailed value charts.
Click to expand...
Agreed!  I have read the through detailed value charts,  sometimes I can't determine If I hold a player in higher regard then where's he's actually suitably positioned, this is where I have to combine multiple readings from other sites to make an informed guess.

I find with all the DFS stuff here lately the ball is being dropped for the loyal fantasy people that got this party started in the first place.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Agree that the lack of updates have been a huge disappointment this season.  With the lack of updates and the Myfbg "upgrade", I have gotten the least amount of value out of my subscription in many, many years. 

 
Weekly projections are hard...

Seasonal prognostications are very difficult...

Year-after -year rankings are a Rubik's Cube...

"Give a Man a Fish, and You Feed Him for a Day. Teach a Man To Fish, and You Feed Him for a Lifetime"

Harstaad abides...

 
ZWK said:
Harstad & Hindery are putting out things that are better than rankings, but unfortunately this means that FBG's dynasty-ranking-like content is spread across 3 different places. It would be nice to be able to see their rankings alongside Tefertiller's and Simpkins's on the dynasty rankings page, and then have the option of clicking through for their more detailed value charts.




1
Click to expand...
Fair point. I'll update my rankings alongside my charts next week.

 
Adam Harstad said:
Fair point. I'll update my rankings alongside my charts next week.
Click to expand...
You mean if the charts don't magically disappear from the list of weekly content and not get published as happened to three of the seven dynasty related articles this week (charts included)?

If you can't tell Adam, I think that's one of FBG's worst practices.  Life happens.  Time runs short.  It happens to all of us.  So just come clean and post that.  Don't ultimately delete the articles from the Weekly Content list and pretend like they never planned to be published.  

 
SayWhat? said:
You mean if the charts don't magically disappear from the list of weekly content and not get published as happened to three of the seven dynasty related articles this week (charts included)?

If you can't tell Adam, I think that's one of FBG's worst practices.  Life happens.  Time runs short.  It happens to all of us.  So just come clean and post that.  Don't ultimately delete the articles from the Weekly Content list and pretend like they never planned to be published.  




 




 




 
Click to expand...
I don't manage the weekly content page, and I don't know anything about my charts being listed and then disappearing this week. If they were listed, then they were listed in error; I'm scheduled to do them on even weeks, which would be last week and next week.

I'm also alternating strategy pieces, with dynasty-specific ones on odd weeks and non-dynasty-specific ones on even weeks. There was a mix-up the last two weeks when I wanted to switch my dynasty and non-dynasty weeks so that the information was more timely and relevant, and I believe that led to the wrong article being listed in the wrong weeks. In which case, I'm sure Clayton deleted it and corrected it once I submitted the opposite article from the one he was expecting. That one is entirely on me for not communicating the change better with Clayton.

Still, I'm on the hook for three features. A weekly update on my quarterback streaming project, a weekly strategy piece, (alternating between dynasty specific and generally applicable), and my bi-weekly value charts. All three typically come later in the week, but I haven't missed any deadlines, so any of my features that have disappeared from the weekly content page were definitely ones that were listed in error in the first place.

I don't usually check the content page in any given week, but since you say this has been a problem, I'm going to set a reminder and start checking every Monday to make sure that I'm only listed for the features I'm actually scheduled to provide for that week. If there are any other errors I'll see if we can't get them cleaned up early. Thanks for the heads up on that, because I agree that it's not a good look for anyone involved.

 
I wish more folks were updating the IDP Dynasty rankings in season, there seems to be much more shuffling with some of the defensive positions like DB's than the offense ones.

 
@Adam Harstad Great update.  Thanks for taking the time to clarify.  Yes, your two articles were listed this week then disappeared, as did the Waivers of the Future.  So it appeared as if three of the seven dynasty articles were deleted from the planned Weekly Content.  At least for your two articles, it sounds like it was simply an error that they were even listed in the first place, so my apologies for going a bit on the attack towards you personally.  

 
SayWhat? said:
@Adam Harstad Great update.  Thanks for taking the time to clarify.  Yes, your two articles were listed this week then disappeared, as did the Waivers of the Future.  So it appeared as if three of the seven dynasty articles were deleted from the planned Weekly Content.  At least for your two articles, it sounds like it was simply an error that they were even listed in the first place, so my apologies for going a bit on the attack towards you personally.  




 
Click to expand...
Not at all. I totally get what it looks like from your perspective-- content is implicitly promised and then not delivered. Worst of all, the whole process from your standpoint is completely opaque. That's not a good look, and me figuring out why it happened doesn't absolve from the fact that it happened in the first place. It's my content, it's my responsibility, and I'm sorry.

You're understandably frustrated, and I thought you were really civil and to-the-point despite that, which I appreciated. Trying to raise the curtain a bit and make the process a tad less opaque is what I'm here for.

I also appreciate you letting me know it happened so I'll be sure to do a better job communicating and coordinating with Clayton going forward so I'm not disappointing anyone again. I've already double-checked this week, and what I'm down for is what I'm delivering.

 
Thank you so much fro bringing this up, Milkman.

Dynasty values vary wildly from week to week in season, and this is a HUGE part of why I initially paid for the the subscription years ago, as there were many knowledgeable staff members who kept up on these fluctuating dynasty player rankings on a weekly basis throughout the NFL season. Now, it has become an afterthought. 

Just puzzling as to why there is no effort at all placed on in season dynasty rankings. This was the number one reason for me to purchase the content when I joined years ago.

As a long time subscriber to the FBG, I will be taking my $$ subscription elsewhere after this season based on this feature or lack of feature.

 
Yeah it makes me sad, but after many years of purchasing an FBG subscription, this will be my last.

Joe always said that if we weren't happy he would refund.

After Draft Dominator wouldn't let me update the rankings & I bombed my draft I emailed FBG, no response so forwarded it to Joe and his reply was to send it to the original address again. Not great.

While the few guys on FBG who publish dynasty articles do a GREAT job, they don't have much support and there's other sites out there with more dynasty content.

I just wish I could pay per view for Norton's Eyes of the guru. Best article on the net.

 
Casting Couch said:
Thank you so much fro bringing this up, Milkman.

Dynasty values vary wildly from week to week in season, and this is a HUGE part of why I initially paid for the the subscription years ago, as there were many knowledgeable staff members who kept up on these fluctuating dynasty player rankings on a weekly basis throughout the NFL season. Now, it has become an afterthought. 

Just puzzling as to why there is no effort at all placed on in season dynasty rankings. This was the number one reason for me to purchase the content when I joined years ago.

As a long time subscriber to the FBG, I will be taking my $$ subscription elsewhere after this season based on this feature or lack of feature.
Click to expand...
I could not agree more with every aspect of this post. 

 
It would be nice if they kept it up with every staffer submitting a set of rankings once a month or if the trade value chart was updated weekly. Maybe they are transitioning over to more of DFS site I'm not sure.

 
One of the rankers loves young unproven players way too much... Enough to skew the conensus rankings a lot.   They actually look better now than they have for the past year even though Brandon Cooks is ahead of Antonio Brown,  Julio and AJG right now.   How does QB age never factor in?  At least they moved Gronk out of the top 10 now. 

 
kittenmittens said:
One of the rankers loves young unproven players way too much... Enough to skew the conensus rankings a lot.   They actually look better now than they have for the past year even though Brandon Cooks is ahead of Antonio Brown,  Julio and AJG right now.   How does QB age never factor in?  At least they moved Gronk out of the top 10 now. 
Click to expand...
Which is why the more staffers that participate the better........

 
Yeah,  it is so bad that I don't even look at that anymore.   IIRC the last time I looked before just now Laquan Treadwell and Kevin White were in the top 15. 

 
kittenmittens said:
One of the rankers loves young unproven players way too much... Enough to skew the conensus rankings a lot.   They actually look better now than they have for the past year even though Brandon Cooks is ahead of Antonio Brown,  Julio and AJG right now.   How does QB age never factor in?  At least they moved Gronk out of the top 10 now. 
Click to expand...
This! :thumbup:

 
kittenmittens said:
One of the rankers loves young unproven players way too much... Enough to skew the conensus rankings a lot.   They actually look better now than they have for the past year even though Brandon Cooks is ahead of Antonio Brown,  Julio and AJG right now.   How does QB age never factor in?  At least they moved Gronk out of the top 10 now. 




 
Click to expand...




This is my biggest issue with the dynasty rankings here.  The one staff member that updates most frequently tends to be very contrarian in his rankings.  There have been posts where he has explained his position and I understand his thought process.  But if you are going to only have one set of rankings in a given 35-day window, it would seem to make the most sense to use someone who is closer to the consensus on rankings.  By not doing so, the dynasty rankings attributed to FBG are vastly different than the community at large.  I don't mind that if I have confidence in the rankings or if they're from one of the more experienced people here.  But I have concerns about the rankings (are they a little too extreme for shock value or to trumpet a few contrarian picks) and the writer just starting writing fantasy so I don't have that long track record to rely on.  I do note, however, that the waivers of the future article raises concern as to the extent of dynasty experience, knowledge, etc.  By way of example, Jeremy Langford is listed as a guy that may be available in leagues with roster sizes between 25 and 40 players.  And that guys like Sims, Coates, Sharpe, Crowder, and many others might be available in leagues with less than 25 man rosters.  In most leagues that size I'm going back and forth between adding Peyton Barber, Farrow, Thielen, or Vernon Davis.  Not a dig on that article but it shows that it may be tough to have only one person be the face of FBG's in season dynasty rankings, particularly when that one guy wasn't here when Joe was still selling boats.

I also note that one of the charts (I think that it's Harstad's player valuation), on at least one occasion, relied on the rankings of the same writer so that information had the same bias/skewing.

 
Really no offense to Simpkins because to each his own-- just stinks when trying to use the (typically) only updated rankings to work a feasible trade and he's got guys all over the board.

Seeing Justin Houston as the number 10 ranked dynasty LB just immediately makes me go to other sites looking for dynasty LB rankings. 

 
SeanTaylor21 said:
Really no offense to Simpkins because to each his own-- just stinks when trying to use the (typically) only updated rankings to work a feasible trade and he's got guys all over the board.

Seeing Justin Houston as the number 10 ranked dynasty LB just immediately makes me go to other sites looking for dynasty LB rankings. 
Click to expand...


There are other sites that take the time and effort to update dynasty rankings on a weekly basis. 

Based on the extremely small sample size of the dynasty rankings updated regularly on the FBG Subscription, I can say with confidence, they are borderline worthless.

 
Not to pile on but...  Kevin White is about the same value as Hopkins...    :no:

Hopkins only like a week older than White. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
kittenmittens said:
Not to pile on but...  Kevin White is about the same value as Hopkins...    :no:

Hopkins only like a week older than White. 




 




 
Click to expand...


As a follow-up to my earlier post, I'm ok with the one writer having that ranking.  I disagree with it.  But he has been here several times and explained his thought process -- in considerable detail IIRC.  And I appreciate that he explained his thoughts, and actually like having someone going against the consensus.  Other sites have writers with wild rankings.  The problem is when this is the only ranking that FBGs offers.  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sounds to me like anyone who is here for the dynasty content should just move on starting now and go to other sites that have more of a dynasty focus and less DFS.  Seems simple.

 
wakelawyer said:
As a follow-up to my earlier post, I'm ok with the one writer having that ranking.  I disagree with it.  But he has been here several times and explained his thought process -- in considerable detail IIRC.  And I appreciate that he explained his thoughts, and actually like having someone going against the consensus.  Other sites have writers with wild rankings.  The problem is when this is the only ranking that FBGs offers.  
Click to expand...
Knowledgeable staff members updating dynasty rankings regularly is a big part of fantasy football, especially to those looking to make trades during the NFL/ fantasy football season. FBG has chosen to ignored this, and they have lost another customer because of it.

 
Well in FBG's defense there really isn't that many replies in here for as long as it's been posted so maybe they're right to move on from the dynasty format..........

 
Milkman said:
Well in FBG's defense there really isn't that many replies in here for as long as it's been posted so maybe they're right to move on from the dynasty format..........
Click to expand...
 That or there are those of us in here who aren't posting because  this lack of attention to dynasty rankings and content by football guys has been ongoing, hasn't gotten better nor truly addressed by staff, and we are now nearing the point of  :deadhorse:

 
There are some decent dynasty threads on the board, and some guys (EBF, for example) take the time to post some really excellent stuff.

 
While we are being critical here,  I do think the staff does an amazing job overall.   FBG is held to a high standard because they do a great job, and just to be clear this isn't hate it is friendly honest feedback.

One of the best things about Dynasty is that drastically different opinions are more prevelent because there is no established consensus cheat sheet to refer to. 

 
If number of posts in this thread will help gain support for more dynasty ranking updates, then I'll add a post to the pile as dynasty leagues are half of the leagues I play in. 

 
Adam Harstad said:
Not at all. I totally get what it looks like from your perspective-- content is implicitly promised and then not delivered. Worst of all, the whole process from your standpoint is completely opaque. That's not a good look, and me figuring out why it happened doesn't absolve from the fact that it happened in the first place. It's my content, it's my responsibility, and I'm sorry.

You're understandably frustrated, and I thought you were really civil and to-the-point despite that, which I appreciated. Trying to raise the curtain a bit and make the process a tad less opaque is what I'm here for.

I also appreciate you letting me know it happened so I'll be sure to do a better job communicating and coordinating with Clayton going forward so I'm not disappointing anyone again. I've already double-checked this week, and what I'm down for is what I'm delivering.
Click to expand...
Excellent response. 

 
Dynasty rankings haven't been a FBG strong point for a number of years. I seem to recall a PM or email conversation with Joe (a few years back) regarding (what I thought was) low staff participation and lack of regular updates to those rankings. He basically said they were working on improving dynasty content moving forward. Well, they have, with the additions of Tefertiller, Harstad and Simpkins. There is more dynasty content then ever before. Still, rankings leave a lot to be desired.

The weekly content page is a different story. Used to be a time when expected release dates of the articles would be posted. It may not be an accurate statement but, those dates were often missed and sometimes an expected article or feature would disappear from the list without explanation. I'm not sure it's improved all that much.

 
Ruffrodys05 said:
He basically said they were working on improving dynasty content moving forward. Well, they have, with the additions of Tefertiller, Harstad and Simpkins. There is more dynasty content then ever before.
Click to expand...
more != improved

 
ex-ghost said:
What are the best sites for dynasty content?
Click to expand...
I always liked dynastyleaguefootball but I haven't used it since they started requiring a subscription a year or two ago.  I would imagine the quality of the content has only gone up since they began charging, as well. I will definitely check them out when my FBG subscription expires in March.  The dynasty content on here has been bad for a while but unfortunately I purchased a three-year subscription in 2014. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
SayWhat? said:
You mean if the charts don't magically disappear from the list of weekly content and not get published as happened to three of the seven dynasty related articles this week (charts included)?

If you can't tell Adam, I think that's one of FBG's worst practices.  Life happens.  Time runs short.  It happens to all of us.  So just come clean and post that.  Don't ultimately delete the articles from the Weekly Content list and pretend like they never planned to be published.  
Click to expand...


Adam Harstad said:
I don't manage the weekly content page, and I don't know anything about my charts being listed and then disappearing this week. If they were listed, then they were listed in error; I'm scheduled to do them on even weeks, which would be last week and next week.
Click to expand...
Even numbered week.  Dynasty value charts listed as a to-be published article up until today, then simply disappears.  

This isn't intended as solely calling you out Adam, but this is my last year subscribing.  Since there is nothing that definitively lays out what a subscription gets you, it seems safe to assume at least the same content as prior years.  I guess that's true, as articles are late/not posted, rankings never updated, and now even contests get pulled without notice (WDIS).  As a dynasty junkie, it's understandable that the cash cow that is DFS has truly taken over FBGs.  Understandable, yet sad.  

 
I think Harstad is coming up with a new system for his value chart and that might be why it's not out this week. I've got nothing but respect for his opinion because I think he does a great job of staying unbiased. I do look forward to checking out those trade value charts though so hopefully they come back soon.

 
Milkman said:
I think Harstad is coming up with a new system for his value chart and that might be why it's not out this week. I've got nothing but respect for his opinion because I think he does a great job of staying unbiased. I do look forward to checking out those trade value charts though so hopefully they come back soon.
Click to expand...
It's been listed for the last 3 weeks & pulled every Saturday evening. Hopefully we get an update before the season is over & they don't save his new system unveiling for 2017 subscribers.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Judge Smails
Trying to understand FBG rankings
Replies
11
Views
695
gethugefast1
gethugefast1
S
  • Locked
FBG Dynasty Content - Ripoff
Replies
1
Views
535
Joe Bryant
Joe Bryant
TSquaredUA
  • Locked
Sigmund Bloom Rankings
Replies
1
Views
806
Joe Bryant
Joe Bryant

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top