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.

Accountability or a "Reflection" Article Each Week on the FBG Rankings? Can this be done? (1 Viewer)

E

eoMMan

Footballguy
There are a few different rankings put out each week by Footballguys but I assume that the final rankings e-mailed by Joe later in the week is what they are standing by.

Is it possible to have a staff member go over the rankings the following week in an article?

It could be called a "reflection" article.   :D   It could go over what guys did well compared to the rankings and who didn't do so well.  Why did some guys outperform their rankings?  Why did some guys fall short of their rankings?  

I think it would be a great feature each week for everyone.  We can learn as a group and maybe the rankings will get better as time goes on.

Thoughts?

@Joe Bryant

 
eoMMan said:
There are a few different rankings put out each week by Footballguys but I assume that the final rankings e-mailed by Joe later in the week is what they are standing by.

Is it possible to have a staff member go over the rankings the following week in an article?

It could be called a "reflection" article.   :D   It could go over what guys did well compared to the rankings and who didn't do so well.  Why did some guys outperform their rankings?  Why did some guys fall short of their rankings?  

I think it would be a great feature each week for everyone.  We can learn as a group and maybe the rankings will get better as time goes on.

Thoughts?

@Joe Bryant
Click to expand...
I'd enjoy this... not sure it'll happen though

 
Perhaps FBG Hit & Miss. This helps us both ways... We see trends, good choices that hit, and others that actually took their stock down. 

No one is perfect at this. I wonder who are more accurate than others (76% accurate, etc.)? Put your work, site, discernment, and gut to the test.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I mean even these experts and gurus on TV. Do a study on who predicts the best based upon before and after. I always wonder about that. Most often they're on to a new week prognosticating. 

 
I agree that no fantasy analyst is perfect. For example, another fantasy pro said on his weekly podcast this week to drop Amari Cooper. He called it a "sabotage drop", meaning that he'll stink for someone else. After Cooper lit it up on Sunday,  I'm gonna bet he's rethinking dropping him.

But that's my point. Why did he turn it around? Matchup? Were we wrong about the Cleveland defense? Was Carr bound to have a big game?

See? So many things can be discussed and analyzed when we look back on how we originally valued or ranked players.

 
eoMMan said:
There are a few different rankings put out each week by Footballguys but I assume that the final rankings e-mailed by Joe later in the week is what they are standing by.

Is it possible to have a staff member go over the rankings the following week in an article?

It could be called a "reflection" article.   :D   It could go over what guys did well compared to the rankings and who didn't do so well.  Why did some guys outperform their rankings?  Why did some guys fall short of their rankings?  

I think it would be a great feature each week for everyone.  We can learn as a group and maybe the rankings will get better as time goes on.

Thoughts?

@Joe Bryant
Click to expand...
yeah this would be a good idea. would be a little tricky because there are so many players, and how would you choose which players to discuss? I was a goof this weekend, and read a few articles on CBS hyping Godwin against the Bears so i started him this week (other options weren't pretty so not that great). But yeah, would love to hear feedback after the games to get a better idea of the process behind it and to figure out was it a flukey thing, or was there something seen that game that has a fantasy expert rethinking confidence for future predictions. 

and i saw Cooper mentioned in this thread. i would be fine if they were to admit that the variability in a player is just the reality, and they can give a ranking number each week, but the actual prediction could land with a floor of 1 catch for the week vs. 10 catches as his ceiling. 

 
This would be a terrible idea. Not for us, but for the business. Best case scenario it shows people who already give them money they made the right move. Worst case it makes subscribers rethink their options next year. 

 
modogg said:
yeah this would be a good idea. would be a little tricky because there are so many players, and how would you choose which players to discuss? I was a goof this weekend, and read a few articles on CBS hyping Godwin against the Bears so i started him this week (other options weren't pretty so not that great). But yeah, would love to hear feedback after the games to get a better idea of the process behind it and to figure out was it a flukey thing, or was there something seen that game that has a fantasy expert rethinking confidence for future predictions. 

and i saw Cooper mentioned in this thread. i would be fine if they were to admit that the variability in a player is just the reality, and they can give a ranking number each week, but the actual prediction could land with a floor of 1 catch for the week vs. 10 catches as his ceiling. 
Click to expand...
Having had our league on CBS for over 10 years I pay zero attention to their prognosticating. It’s generally been pretty poor overall. 

 
It would be too time consuming to run through every player ranking in hindsight.......when the simple explanation for variance might just be that "##### happens" rather than some analytical oversight.

It would be interesting in some context but I imagine they are gearing up toward the next week as opposed to looking back. 

 
Jacksonke1 said:
It would be too time consuming to run through every player ranking in hindsight.......when the simple explanation for variance might just be that "##### happens" rather than some analytical oversight.

It would be interesting in some context but I imagine they are gearing up toward the next week as opposed to looking back. 
Click to expand...
But you never learn anything by not reviewing what you did.  Makes no sense.

It's like making a budget and never looking back if the budget was followed. 

And not every player should be looked at. Just focus on the bigger variances and why the failed or succeeded.

 
eoMMan said:
But you never learn anything by not reviewing what you did.  Makes no sense.

It's like making a budget and never looking back if the budget was followed. 

And not every player should be looked at. Just focus on the bigger variances and why the failed or succeeded.
Click to expand...
yeah, i'd be happy to let whoever writes the article choose 3-5 that stick out to them, and write an article each week. Could be easier that way when you can identify a reason why something didn't work, or why something seemed to work very well.

 
Hilts said:
This would be a terrible idea. Not for us, but for the business. Best case scenario it shows people who already give them money they made the right move. Worst case it makes subscribers rethink their options next year. 
Click to expand...
This. It would be an awesome idea but I doubt they’ll do it. I get frustrated when a guy is a 50%+ waiver priority but then when he falls flat the next week there’s very little mention and simply onto the next pickup (IE Sammy Coates last year) 

 
Ever see a weather man come on the air and say, "Look, I don't know what happened... all the models pointed to a calm, sunny day... "

NO! He comes on the air and talks about tomorrow's weather.

You guys do know that this stuff is largely unpredictable, right?

 
Dizzy said:
Ever see a weather man come on the air and say, "Look, I don't know what happened... all the models pointed to a calm, sunny day... "

NO! He comes on the air and talks about tomorrow's weather.

You guys do know that this stuff is largely unpredictable, right?
Click to expand...
I totally agree with your sentiment about FBG and unpredictability but you always hear weathermen take account when they've missed a storm by a large margin. Always happened during snow models in CT.  

Your point is still taken, but it might be nice to hear about snap counts, what each person was thinking and why, etc.  

 
Their are sites that do rank the experts picks accuracy but the ones I have seen are all season long which makes sense since in any one week there has to be too much variability.

 
I can see why the idea would be appealing, but the way weekly projections are done I don't think the article would help much.  Most projections are player A is going to get 6-7 targets for 5 receptions for 70 yards and .5 TDs.  If player A then has 7 receptions for 120 yards and 1 TD, they were way off on the expected points but really they were pretty close on the usage.

Most sites give what I like to think of as the average production if the week was played 100 times.  But we only get one game played with an oblong ball and weird stuff happens and we over analyze it. 

Not  sure what this article would give us in analysis that wouldn't be covered in the other articles.

 
Listening to the podcasts is a good way to get some of the analysis you are looking for, especially On the Couch with Sigmund Bloom, where they take a longer view and more holistic approach than just "who should I pick up this week"  (the waiver wire podcast covers that), the Week X preview covers who should I start, etc.

Warning - I should note that Sigmund can get overly excited about certain players - that burned me the first year I listed to him.  News flash - there are not 50 league winners out there no matter how good a guy looked this week.  But once you learn a ranker's personality you can get a better judge of when to jump in on his recommendations and when to be more skeptical.  And at least Sigmund is well aware of his excitable nature.

Other podcasters are overly cautious too - "I'm not going to invest in a guy just because he broke an NFL record each of the past five weeks - I need to see more history."  

Ultimately, rankings are just a guideline.  The final decision of who to roster, who to start, etc. is yours.  But knowing WHY Sigmund thinks this guy is a sure fire HOF can help me make a more informed decision - and just about every year they induct seven more guys into Canton, so somebody out there that you never heard of yet will get into the HOF.  And I guarantee you that Sigmund will hype that guy A LOT.  So just remember - you heard it from him first.  ;-)

 
Last edited by a moderator:
eoMMan said:
There are a few different rankings put out each week by Footballguys but I assume that the final rankings e-mailed by Joe later in the week is what they are standing by.

Is it possible to have a staff member go over the rankings the following week in an article?

It could be called a "reflection" article.   :D   It could go over what guys did well compared to the rankings and who didn't do so well.  Why did some guys outperform their rankings?  Why did some guys fall short of their rankings?  

I think it would be a great feature each week for everyone.  We can learn as a group and maybe the rankings will get better as time goes on.

Thoughts?

@Joe Bryant
Click to expand...
I don’t understand why this would be necessary.  They write player updates and game recaps and then rerank the players for the next game each week.  That right there tells you who moved up and who moved down and why.

And what do you mean by “accountability”?  Rankings don’t tell us what will happen in the future they tell us what is more probable to happen in the future.  Less probable things are going to happen too, that’s just reality.

Were rankings that didn’t have Nick Chubbs as a top 5 RB last week wrong or is running for two long TDs on three carries a less likely outcome that nonetheless happened?  

All we can do is minimize unnecessary risk by research and evaluation to determine most likely outcomes.  If somebody reads a list ranking most likely outcomes and doesn’t understand that less likely outcomes will happen too they need to reset their expectations.

 
modogg said:
yeah, i'd be happy to let whoever writes the article choose 3-5 that stick out to them, and write an article each week. Could be easier that way when you can identify a reason why something didn't work, or why something seemed to work very well.
Click to expand...
assumption of rational coaching.

 
beerbuff said:
Their are sites that do rank the experts picks accuracy but the ones I have seen are all season long which makes sense since in any one week there has to be too much variability.
Click to expand...
FBG's pulled their numbers from those sites IIRC so they no longer appear in the rankings.  They gave reasoning but the optics aren't good from the perspective of a prospective schlub they are trying to milk a subscription out of.

 
Walking Boot said:
Projections are too similar to make any sense among the noise. 

The #1 QB for the week might be projected to score 24 points. The #13 QB, which means a bench guy, might get projected for 20. All the startable guys are within those 4 points. The #1 RB might be projected for 12, the #25 guy 7. Everyone startable within those 5 points.

Then the real numbers turn out one QB puts up 40, a few other guys put up 30, etc. Some RB is gonna get 25, a few more 18-20.

WR is a total crapshoot. 

The thing is that the projected numbers compared to the deviations make it all pretty irrelevant. 

Plus, what's the method of accountability? I mean, do you want accurately projected numbers, or, accurate rankings against other players? If Tom Brady is ranked #1 for the week and projected to score 22, and CJ Beathard is ranked #25 and projected to score 14, and then Tom Brady does end up #1 for week with 35, but Beathard is #2 with 33, the rankings are 'good' (Brady ahead of Beathard) but the projections aren't close. 

With everyone always bunched up in projected numbers the couple of points that separate them don't mean anything to judge anyone's rankings against. 
Click to expand...
There are ways to make the metrics more meaningful.  Compare projections to a consensus and focus on the individual outliers.  Success is relative.  In your example, the guy who projected Beathard to be QB12 would rate more highly than the one who projected him at QB25.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Joe Bryant
Feedback - Footballguys Business - Handling Bad Luck/Wrong Advice?
2 3
Replies
115
Views
3K
Deranged Hermit
Deranged Hermit
T
travdogg's positional rankings from week 17 onward
Replies
11
Views
752
travdogg
T
Ministry of Pain
The Shark Re-Draft XL 2023-RB rankings in May can suction a golf ball thru a garden hose, let me demonstrate it for you
Replies
10
Views
727
Ministry of Pain
Ministry of Pain

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top