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.

Footballguys 2020 Detailed Stat Projections Ready (1 Viewer)

Joe Bryant

Joe Bryant

Guide
Staff member
It's way early and plenty will change of course. But we've got our 2020 Detailed Stat Projections ready for you here for offensive players. 

And for now, free to everyone. 

Let's hear what you think and where you'd project differently. 

As always, let's use this board as a place where we can discuss and all benefit. 

Meaning, if you have a different opinion, state your opinion and back up why you think it. 

Let's all get better at this. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Godwin and Evans are both ranked pretty high. One may finish with those numbers, but doubtful that of Brady’s 3600 yds predicted passing,  2700 goes to evans and Godwin. Sure it’s Bruce arians offense but i can’t see Brady ignoring both the backfield and te.

The numbers aren’t really adding up for this teams predictions. Just a quick look and Evans/Godwin combine for about 2700, Howard/brate for 800+, and Jones 218, which eclipses Brady’s predicted 3600 passing yds and doesn’t account for the rest of the teams wr and rb (barber 108, rest unclear) Maybe I’m not accounting for sack yds lost.

A team page or filter would be really cool. Thanks for opening this up to the public, certainly can use some distraction.

 
Snorkelson said:
Godwin and Evans are both ranked pretty high. One may finish with those numbers, but doubtful that of Brady’s 3600 yds predicted passing,  2700 goes to evans and Godwin. Sure it’s Bruce arians offense but i can’t see Brady ignoring both the backfield and te.

The numbers aren’t really adding up for this teams predictions. Just a quick look and Evans/Godwin combine for about 2700, Howard/brate for 800+, and Jones 218, which eclipses Brady’s predicted 3600 passing yds and doesn’t account for the rest of the teams wr and rb (barber 108, rest unclear) Maybe I’m not accounting for sack yds lost.

A team page or filter would be really cool. Thanks for opening this up to the public, certainly can use some distraction.
Click to expand...
If you click on the team for any player, that will take you to the full projection for that team. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
It's way early and plenty will change of course. But we've got our 2020 Detailed Stat Projections ready for you here for offensive players. 

And for now, free to everyone. 

Let's hear what you think and where you'd project differently. 

As always, let's use this board as a place where we can discuss and all benefit. 

Meaning, if you have a different opinion, state your opinion and back up why you think it. 

Let's all get better at this. 
Click to expand...
Curious - do these projections skew towards the high or low end of possible outcomes?

 
Snorkelson said:
A team page or filter would be really cool. Thanks for opening this up to the public, certainly can use some distraction.
Click to expand...
You can click on a team to go to the team filter. https://subscribers.footballguys.com/myfbg/myviewprojections-team.php?team=rav&projector=2&profile=p

 
wgoldsph said:
Curious - do these projections skew towards the high or low end of possible outcomes?
Click to expand...
We try to hit what we think will happen. Some will surely be high and low but that's not intentional. 

It's obviously ridiculously early but the "game" of projections is always sort of like this. You make the best call you can with the information you have. As the season nears, we'll continue to get better and better information. And certainly, after the rookies are drafted, we'll have much more information. 

 
Joe Bryant said:
This is kind of what I meant on the discussion. Always tons more helpful to talk about what you think will happen. 

How do you project that backfield / offense?
Click to expand...
Obviously NE is not only going to throw the ball only 220 times (the number listed for Stidham). The whole team projection is a bit of a mess. It's unlikely Gronk is coming back. I know they are a tough team to project, but I would start by giving Stidham a full slate of projected numbers as he most likely will be their starter this year. I don't see them having the desire or the cap room to bring in Newton, Winston, or Dalton. They will end up with a TE from somewhere (and another WR from somewhere as well). Overall, the NE offensive numbers will approach last year's . . . it's just finding ways to project that at this point that will be tough to accomplish.

 
Joe Bryant said:
This is kind of what I meant on the discussion. Always tons more helpful to talk about what you think will happen. 

How do you project that backfield / offense?
Click to expand...
with Cleveland having already improved the o-line, likely signing/drafting a LT and new coaching that isnt as inept as a shoehorn....

i cant help but think he'd improve on his #8 overall finish at RB for PPR... nevermind non-PPR where he should probably be a top/5 at worst in projections

 
Joe Bryant said:
This is kind of what I meant on the discussion. Always tons more helpful to talk about what you think will happen. 

How do you project that backfield / offense?
Click to expand...
I know it wasn't addressed to me, but I had the split in the backfield more Chubb 250 carries and Hunt 150.  Not far off from mine though.  

Where I have the largest difference is in Mayfield's attempts.  I have him at 470 for 15 games so about 500 for 16.  I think Stefanski is going to limit the passing and they aren't going to be anywhere what it was last year in CLE.  I also think Landry's target share should be higher and closer to OBJ's.

I like the projections overall.  I do wish that you would stick to a consistent number of games for each player for comparison sake.  I do 15 game projections for all players as week 17 doesn't matter.  I also remove it from my historical numbers.

Peace,
James

 
Dr. Octopus said:
There's 7 point difference for him to move up to 8 and 13 point difference to move up to 7. Maybe you're just nitpicking?
Click to expand...
he finished as the #8 in ppr last season in the most ineptly coached browns team ive seen in ages. Yes, including hue. 

And he's getting downgraded? Nah, not for me

 
Soulfly3 said:
he finished as the #8 in ppr last season in the most ineptly coached browns team ive seen in ages. Yes, including hue. 

And he's getting downgraded? Nah, not for me
Click to expand...
Well his number of targets and receptions took a nosedive when Hunt came back. Maybe his second half catch numbers are more in line with what to expect than his first half catch numbers. That might make a slight difference in PPR which is all it takes to move back a spot or two...

 
Soulfly3 said:
with Cleveland having already improved the o-line, likely signing/drafting a LT and new coaching that isnt as inept as a shoehorn....

i cant help but think he'd improve on his #8 overall finish at RB for PPR... nevermind non-PPR where he should probably be a top/5 at worst in projections
Click to expand...
Thanks. What stats do you project for him? 

 
Soulfly3 said:
id be lying if i said ive done my projections yet. yours dont look too far off of where i'd have him, i assume.

id just have others under that
Click to expand...
Cool. Please post yours when you get them. And for sure, these will be changing radically. It's our first cut. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Joe Bryant said:
Cool. Please post yours when you get them. And for sure, these will be changing radically. It's our first cut. 
Click to expand...
Joe - 

There's always been one thing that I haven't really been a fan of or fully understood when it comes to FBG projections. I am making up a theoretical here, but there have been plenty of times when this type of situation has happened. Let's say a team with similar coaches, coordinators, and the same QB for years have consistently had a team WR2 that put up 75 receptions for 900 yards and 9 TD (to make the math easy). And their actual WR2 from the year before moved on and there is no clear cut WR2 moving forward.

I have often seen FBG projections that take three receivers and give them each roughly 20-200-2 for projections when in reality for several years there has been a guy with 75-900-9. (Basically, 15 receptions, 300 yards, and 3 TD fall out of the mix this way.)

So the projections will have the QB numbers projected too low and the three receivers all valued roughly the same (when one will be worth way more and two guys won't be worth much at all). IMO, I would rather see the QB projected with higher numbers (that have been established already) and a best guess as to which guy will be the new WR2 and projected accordingly.

In what I just outlined, there is very little chance that all the receivers will put up mediocre numbers, so I would rather have FBG project one of them at 75-900-9. If things change over time, I would rather have which player is projected to compile those numbers changed in the projections if it looks like someone else has taken the lead in the WR2 battle than hedging multiple guys in the WR pipeline.

Hopefully you understand what I am saying and can explain why many times the projections are done as I outlined.

 
Anarchy99 said:
Joe - 

There's always been one thing that I haven't really been a fan of or fully understood when it comes to FBG projections. I am making up a theoretical here, but there have been plenty of times when this type of situation has happened. Let's say a team with similar coaches, coordinators, and the same QB for years have consistently had a team WR2 that put up 75 receptions for 900 yards and 9 TD (to make the math easy). And their actual WR2 from the year before moved on and there is no clear cut WR2 moving forward.

I have often seen FBG projections that take three receivers and give them each roughly 20-200-2 for projections when in reality for several years there has been a guy with 75-900-9. (Basically, 15 receptions, 300 yards, and 3 TD fall out of the mix this way.)

So the projections will have the QB numbers projected too low and the three receivers all valued roughly the same (when one will be worth way more and two guys won't be worth much at all). IMO, I would rather see the QB projected with higher numbers (that have been established already) and a best guess as to which guy will be the new WR2 and projected accordingly.

In what I just outlined, there is very little chance that all the receivers will put up mediocre numbers, so I would rather have FBG project one of them at 75-900-9. If things change over time, I would rather have which player is projected to compile those numbers changed in the projections if it looks like someone else has taken the lead in the WR2 battle than hedging multiple guys in the WR pipeline.

Hopefully you understand what I am saying and can explain why many times the projections are done as I outlined.
Click to expand...
For this year, where exactly are you seeing this? 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd say the projections for Guice seem off; projecting 15 games but only 150 carries?   If Guice is playing 15 games, he's far more likely to get 230+ carries than 150.    

 
Any chance the projections can be fed into draft dominator?  Useful for dynasty in my opinion with the usual caveats.  

 
miqws said:
Any chance the projections can be fed into draft dominator?  Useful for dynasty in my opinion with the usual caveats.  
Click to expand...
Draft Dominator is not ready yet but will be soon and projections will be the first thing that drives all this. Thanks. 

 
Guys,

Things don't perfectly balance via team totals right now by design. That is being worked and will improve over the next week, but some situations are too fluid to have right before the draft commences.   

 
I think you have Kyler Murray way too high.  The Cardinal's slowed there pace of play down drastically over their last 10 games (67.5 plays per game dropped to 59.3 plays per game).  I believe this was due to 2 reasons...1) the OL couldn't protect Murray long enough for him to pass down field, so they were forced to throw short, which became easier to defend and 2) the Cardinals linebackers couldn't cover anyone, which meant they couldn't get off the field (evidenced by 2nd most plays against).

I don't believe the Cardinal's did enough (yet) to address either of these concerns so I don't expect either to change as of now.  We'll see what they do in the draft.  It doesn't matter how many all-pro receivers you add, you can only do so much in a limited number of pass attempts with a limited amount of time to actually throw the ball.    

 
David Dodds said:
Guys,

Things don't perfectly balance via team totals right now by design. That is being worked and will improve over the next week, but some situations are too fluid to have right before the draft commences.   
Click to expand...
Lol....with all the PC changes around here over the last year or so.....and no "hottest" or yoga pants threads in the FFA....etc....I just realized I find your logo rather "interesting"....

thanks for the early rankings....

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Joe Bryant
Footballguys Classic Apps Ready For 2023
Replies
30
Views
1K
Hurl Bruce
Hurl Bruce
Scoresman
The thread for people who do their own projections
Replies
6
Views
696
yankeerebel
yankeerebel
Joe Bryant
Co-Own A NFFC Prime Time Team with Me
Replies
23
Views
1K
Joe Bryant
Joe Bryant

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Top