POLL CLOSED Player #47 Community Dynasty Rankings (1 Viewer)

After being a bridesmaid in 28 polls, Jordy Nelson finally pulls out the victory with 14 of 62 votes to lock up the 10th pick of the fourth round and the 46th player overall.  Every other player received at least one vote.   

That poll/thread can be viewed here: https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/754997-player-46-community-dynasty-rankings/

HOW TO ADD PLAYERS TO THE LIST

First, you can add a name to the current poll by clicking Other and telling me who you think is better than all players on the current list.  (Please tell me that you clicked the other button in the reply... not just the name of your nominee)

Second, in rounds where no one has clicked the other button to add a player, I will add a single player nominated in the comments.  This will be the player with the most support to be added in the comments (total users nominating that player)... in the event of a tie, it will go to the player first nominated in the comments.

I have the following outstanding nominations:

Golden Tate - 2.5

Marcus Mariotta - 1

Martavis Bryant was added by the other button so no other additions this round. 

Time to pick #47

Standings

1.1.  Odell Beckham

1.2.  Ezekiel Elliot

1.3.  Mike Evans

1.4.  David Johnson

1.5.  LeVeon Bell

1.6.  Antonio Brown

1.7.  Julio Jones

1.8.  Amari Cooper

1.9.  AJ Green

1.10.  (Tie) Deandre Hopkins

        & Rookie Pick 1.1

1.12.  Todd Gurley

Round 2

2.1 Rookie Pick 1.2

2.2 Allen Robinson

2.3  Sammy Watkins

2.4 TY Hilton

2.5 Michael Thomas

2.6 Rob Gronkowski

2.7 Dez Bryant

2.8 Devonta Freeman

2.9  Brandin Cooks

2.10 Jordan Howard

2.11 Melvin Gordon

2.12 Keenan Allen

3.1 Andrew Luck

3.2 Alshon Jeffrey

3.3 Aaron Rodgers

3.4 Rookie Pick 1.3

3.5 Jarvis Landry

3.6 Rookie Pick 1.4

3.7 Travis Kelce

3.8 Jay Ajayi

3.9 Carlos Hyde

3.10 (Tie) Davante Adams

                Jordan Reed

3.12 (tie) Demaryius Thomas

               Derrick Henry

4.2  Rookie Pick 1.5

4.3 Stefon Diggs

4.4 Lamar Miller

4.5 Corey Coleman

4.6 (Tie) Doug Baldwin

              Rookie Pick 1.6

4.8 LeSean McCoy

4.9 Donte Moncreif

4.10 Jordy Nelson

I put this in the last poll, but then immediately closed the thread, so I am reposting it here for your critiques.

I decided to look at Kelvin Benjamin since I have never owned him in any league nor have I ever targeted him in a trade.  and really didn't know much about him.  After his rookie year I remember thinking he was going to be a stud, but then the lost 2015 season happened and he generally dropped off my radar.

At first blush, his 2016 season looked worse than his rookie year since he fewer catches by 10, fewer yards by 67 and fewer TDs by 2.

63-118-941-14.9-50-7     (2016)

73-146-1,008-13.8-9    (2014)

But then I looked deeper and saw that his yards per target jumped more than a full point although his catch rate only increased a little (3% from 50 to 53%).  I also saw that his rookie year had some very weird games... he had 7 games with double digit targets, which normally means excellent points especially in PPR, but in 4 of those seven he had 11 PPR points or less.  (3 of the 4 were below 10 PPR).

I guess i am starting to convince myself that maybe he is following the old time career path of a rookie year learning the ropes and a second year 2016 because of the 2015 injury) where you show that you are about to "get it" followed by a 3rd year explosion.

Again this is a new realization for me with almost no research, so feel free to critique.

Concerning Tyreek Hill, I think some out there are look scornfully at the votes he gets when 1.7 is on the board (in the dynasty trade thread people are talking about 1.12 or even a 2d for Hill).  However, I do not think you appreciate what I will call his market volatility. 

Ask yourself what happens if Hill gets 100 yards in two of the first three games... (even those of you who like him the least have to see that as a strong possibility considering how he ended 2016)... if that happens many if not most that have reservations on him will start to believe and his market value will jump to the 1.3 range if not higher.  (The same could be said of M. Bryant)  By comparison, if Jordy does the exact same, his market value will remain unchanged.

We should have statistical factor to reflect market volatility... something like Upward market volatility # of 15 or more point games in a row or out of 4 to cause a significant change in market value and Downward market volatility= number of less than 10 point games in a row or out of 4 to significantly affect market value.

I think I would rate Hill as a 2 (upward) and a 3 (downward) player. (lower is better for upward, higher is better for downward)

I think I would rate Nelson as a 4 (upward) and a 3 (downward) player. (This means that I think that even if Jordy starts the year off with 3 straight 15 point week or higher, it will not change his market value significantly, but that four in a row would.  I think that if Jordy has 3 of 4 low point weeks his value will drop significantly, but 2 of 4 will not change things much.)

In terms of market volatility value I would say M Bryant beats them both with a 2 (up) and a 4 (down) (folks are going to be fine if he starts slow because he has not played in so long, but if he starts hot (I think some may argue his up value is 1) his value will jump.

Thoughts?

I voted other for Golden Tate.

90 receptions or more each of the last 3 seasons, will be 29 years old August 2nd 2017.

Brisco - what you're saying makes sense to a degree but I think it's largely factored in, even if just as rough estimates. 

Honestly, there isn't much Nelson can do to increase his value short of being a top 5 receiver for the first month or so.  Those who would draft him are banking on the minimum of a strong wr2 while the lack of interest is age.  

@Brisco54

In regards to Kelvin Benjamin, he did improve on his catch percentage and yards per reception numbers in 2016 compared to 2014. However his career yards per target is 7.4 which is below average for a WR. His performance isn't really good enough to command the high number of targets he had in 2014 in my opinion. Ted Ginn is gone (95 targets in 2016) so maybe KB can get more than he had last season. So far he has been boom bust kind of player and needs a lot of volume to have good numbers. He is also 26 years old already and seems to still be learning the finer points of playing the WR position. 

Cam has been a pretty low volume passer thus far in this career, so unless that changes, the pie just isn't as big for Carolina players as most teams.

In regards to Tyreek Hill I can totally understand people voting for him. I am not sure Jeremy Maclin is out of the picture however, Kelce and a RB will demand carries. If Hill can get targets steadily and still has the big play ability he has shown, I could totally see him justifying a pick at this point. At the same time you are taking a risk that he does not get more involved in the KC offense (despite what Andy Reid says) and is an unreliable weekly play. I don't have a strong opinion about this, I could see it going either way. I personally would prefer to take proven players such as Golden Tate before I would want to swing for the fences with what I see as a riskier pick in Hill  ( or Bryant or whoever). 

In the scenario you present, of course the younger ascending player is going to gain more value from a fast start to the 2017 season. A player such as Jordy Nelson has already proven he is a great WR. A WR you are not likely to take out of your lineup as long as he is healthy. Hill would need a very strong year to put up numbers like Nelson. Realistically I think that is unlikely to happen because Nelson has been one of the best WR in the NFL since he broke out in 2011.

Jordy Nelson has averaged 18.7 points per game over the last 3 seasons he has played. There are only 4 WR who have scored more PPG than Nelson over this time frame, Antonio Brown, Odell Beckham, Julio Jones and Keenan Allen. The lowest Jordy Nelson has finished in his last 3 seasons played was WR 13 in 2013. He performs as a WR 1 not a WR 2.

The knock against Neslon is his age, but really no reason I can see that Nelson won't be a top 12 WR again in 2017. Sure maybe Nelson fades to WR 2 numbers in 2018 or 2019. Maybe he doesn't. No other WR has the rapport with Rodgers on those frequent scramble drills like Jordy Nelson. 

So while it is true Jordy Nelsons value cannot increase, that is because he is already performing at a sky high level, and has done so consistntly, repeatedly, something you cannot say about Hill or any of these young promising players who have not reached that level yet, and if they do they likely cannot stay there long the way Nelson has.

Choose other - Golden Tate.

I went Crabtree. WR12 and WR17 the past 2 years, his only 2 on the Raiders. He is 29, but he seems like the style WR that should age well, so at least a couple more high end WR2 seasons are reasonable to expect, IMO. 

Brisco54 said:

Ask yourself what happens if Hill gets 100 yards in two of the first three games... (even those of you who like him the least have to see that as a strong possibility considering how he ended 2016)...

Click to expand...

A strong possibility?

I'm not sure you could even say that about Julio Jones or Antonio Brown.

Yeah that part stood out to me as well.

Dr. Octopus said:

A strong possibility?

I'm not sure you could even say that about Julio Jones or Antonio Brown.

Click to expand...

I guess we are into semantics here, but for me once you hit 51% you hit probability rather than possibility... so to me a strong possibility is somewhere between 25% and 50% chance of occurring.  

Given his performance despite scant usage plus a head coach saying "We are going to focus on ...get[ing] him more reps" as a wr, I think that saying he has a 1 in 3 shot at getting two big games is a defensible opinion.

I'm sure he won't come off the board for a while, but I voted for Hunter Henry. Maybe I'm falling into the trap of overrating a guy after his rookie season (we always see post-rookie year inflation), but I was really impressed by what he did as a 21-year old rookie. I see him settling in as a consistent fantasy TE1 for the next 10 years. 

I have seen a few folks put Henry at the same level as Kelce, who has been off this list for a while.

Brisco54 said:

I guess we are into semantics here, but for me once you hit 51% you hit probability rather than possibility... so to me a strong possibility is somewhere between 25% and 50% chance of occurring.  

Given his performance despite scant usage plus a head coach saying "We are going to focus on ...get[ing] him more reps" as a wr, I think that saying he has a 1 in 3 shot at getting two big games is a defensible opinion.

Click to expand...

Yeah, I interpreted "strong possibility" differently - but this makes more sense.

Brisco54 said:

I guess we are into semantics here, but for me once you hit 51% you hit probability rather than possibility... so to me a strong possibility is somewhere between 25% and 50% chance of occurring.  

Given his performance despite scant usage plus a head coach saying "We are going to focus on ...get[ing] him more reps" as a wr, I think that saying he has a 1 in 3 shot at getting two big games is a defensible opinion.

Click to expand...

I would put a strong possibility at an 80% chance of occurring or higher. Anything below that about 50% is a good possibility. Maybe that's my medical background coming out. In medical research something at 50-75% success if not very good. If I'm going to pick an intervention and it has a 75% chance of success... I am likely picking something very different that is 80-95% success.  You flip a coin, you have a 50% chance of getting tails. Is that strong possibility? I guess that's where I was confused with that statement as well.

Even so, if  he has a 1/3 chance of getting two big games, that's not even 50%. That's 33% I'd call that a strong unlikelihood myself

Dr. Brew said:

I would put a strong possibility at an 80% chance of occurring or higher. Anything below that about 50% is a good possibility. Maybe that's my medical background coming out. In medical research something at 50-75% success if not very good. If I'm going to pick an intervention and it has a 75% chance of success... I am likely picking something very different that is 80-95% success.  You flip a coin, you have a 50% chance of getting tails. Is that strong possibility? I guess that's where I was confused with that statement as well.

Even so, if  he has a 1/3 chance of getting two big games, that's not even 50%. That's 33% I'd call that a strong unlikelihood myself

Click to expand...

I am not sure how to respond to this.  As I explained, I use possibility and probability in a continuing scale.  (Possibility is 0-50%, 51%to 99% is probability)

You apparently do not use the word probability at all but rather limit your self to "possibility" and "unlikelihood"  

How often do yo use the phrase "strong unlikelhood" in daily discourse?  

Most importantly, what do you gain from this response?  I gave a specific percentage range (25-50%) to qualify my opinion so there is no confusion about my assertion.  Are you really trying to convince me that your labeling of a given percentage is somehow superior?

still only 44 votes.  Drat.

Brisco54 said:

I am not sure how to respond to this.  As I explained, I use possibility and probability in a continuing scale.  (Possibility is 0-50%, 51%to 99% is probability)

You apparently do not use the word probability at all but rather limit your self to "possibility" and "unlikelihood"  

How often do yo use the phrase "strong unlikelhood" in daily discourse?  

Most importantly, what do you gain from this response?  I gave a specific percentage range (25-50%) to qualify my opinion so there is no confusion about my assertion.  Are you really trying to convince me that your labeling of a given percentage is somehow superior?

Click to expand...

I don't use the word Strong Unlikelihood in daily discourse. You said it was a strong possibility. There isn't really a word of "strong un-possibility" so I substituted unlikelihood which doesn't make a lot of sense but it was the closest I could come up with. 

To say something is a strong possibility, but it's 33% likely to occur (according to you) is very confusing. It also is, in fact, an oxymoron to even use those two words together. Possibility means something may happen but we do not know how likely it is to occur. Probability means something may happen but we believe it will be more likely to occur. To say something is a "strong possibility" is actually saying that it is a high probability, because you are inferring that you feel it is likely to occur by the use of the term "strong." Likely is equal to probable. If something is likely to happen then it is also more probable to occur. Might as well said it's a probable possibility. 

Perhaps you can now see where the confusion was 

#themoreyouknow

Brisco54 said:

I am not sure how to respond to this.  As I explained, I use possibility and probability in a continuing scale.  (Possibility is 0-50%, 51%to 99% is probability)

You apparently do not use the word probability at all but rather limit your self to "possibility" and "unlikelihood"  

How often do yo use the phrase "strong unlikelhood" in daily discourse?  

Most importantly, what do you gain from this response?  I gave a specific percentage range (25-50%) to qualify my opinion so there is no confusion about my assertion. Are you really trying to convince me that your labeling of a given percentage is somehow superior?

Click to expand...

Are you really asking this question?

-OZ- said:

Are you really asking this question?

Click to expand...

Touche' Oz... Touche'

just three more votes needed to hit the requisite 50.

Brisco54 said:

Dr. Octopus said:

A strong possibility?

I'm not sure you could even say that about Julio Jones or Antonio Brown.

Click to expand...

I guess we are into semantics here, but for me once you hit 51% you hit probability rather than possibility... so to me a strong possibility is somewhere between 25% and 50% chance of occurring.  

Given his performance despite scant usage plus a head coach saying "We are going to focus on ...get[ing] him more reps" as a wr, I think that saying he has a 1 in 3 shot at getting two big games is a defensible opinion.

Click to expand...

This is why numbers are awesome.

There is a great story in the book Superforecasting about a report from a US intelligence agency saying that "an attack on Yugoslavia ... should be considered a serious possibility." The people who worked on the report felt good about this summary as reflecting the consensus view of the whole team that worked on it. Then someone from the State Department asked them what they meant by "serious possibility." Hilarity ensued.

Nominate Mariota again

Kelvin Benjamin wins with 14 of 55 votes.  The next poll is available here:

https://forums.footballguys.com/forum/topic/755078-player-48-community-dynasty-rankings/

ZWK said:

This is why numbers are awesome.

There is a great story in the book Superforecasting about a report from a US intelligence agency saying that "an attack on Yugoslavia ... should be considered a serious possibility." The people who worked on the report felt good about this summary as reflecting the consensus view of the whole team that worked on it. Then someone from the State Department asked them what they meant by "serious possibility." Hilarity ensued.

Click to expand...

I think the author makes an excellent point about needing time lines for any prognostication. 

For me the timeline for projections, or a time frame for rookie players to achieve a level of projected performance is 3 years.