A look back at the FBG Mag Under/Over Valued Articles (1 Viewer)

[BassNBrew]

I don't want to try to make a formula for scoring how well anyone did but do keep in mind that a miss by 2-3 slots for someone ranked at #2 ADP is much more damaging than missing by 2-3 slots on a player with a #22 ADP.

Another step in the right direction...this is not a linear analysis.One day you silly kids will get there.

Instead of agreeing with the suggestions of others, can you actually come up with a thought of your own?

Let's not make this thread about LHUCKS. I'm simply highlighting the reasonable thoughts in this thread to help steer the conversation...which is clearly needed.

You are actually pooping in a decent tread, just like you usually do.

I hate it when I get poo in my tread. The #### just doesn't go away and stinks up the place.Come to think of it, you made a good point with tread.

 

[the branded hand]

I don't want to try to make a formula for scoring how well anyone did but do keep in mind that a miss by 2-3 slots for someone ranked at #2 ADP is much more damaging than missing by 2-3 slots on a player with a #22 ADP.

Another step in the right direction...this is not a linear analysis.One day you silly kids will get there.

Instead of agreeing with the suggestions of others, can you actually come up with a thought of your own?

Let's not make this thread about LHUCKS. I'm simply highlighting the reasonable thoughts in this thread to help steer the conversation...which is clearly needed.

It's like a cross between "Jimmy" from Seinfeld and Dudley Moore's English butler, Hobson, from the movie Arthur.Pearls... we're looking at pearls.

 

[the branded hand]

It is funny because when I first looked at this list I thought the group did poorly but after looking closer that is not the case. I think the overvalued list is more valuable as the group did pretty well in identifying the names to avoid which to me is more importany anyway.

There is value whenever you are willing to do your own due diligence. Opinions based on value are usually best when they allow you to avoid the tendency to take someone too early... or even at all. I always prefer to use the overvalued list to possibly allow value to fall to me. Let other people reach. Doesn't always work, but that's just a tool in the tool box... so to speak.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

The correct way to "score" a result of this would be to look at the ADP.

I'm sure I was a mixed bag on results, but here's an example (probably my best call):

Big Ben - Underrated

ADP:89 (QB13)

ADP on 9/7: 86

He finished as QB3 on a PPG basis.

ADP for QB3 on 9/7: 19

To evaluate the difference, just use a pick calculator:

Pick 86: 268 points

Pick 19: 1076 points



Net win: 808 points

As for scoring a player you label Overrated, just go the other direction:

Lee Evans - Overrated

ADP:66 (WR25)

He finished as WR42 on a PPG basis.

ADP for WR42:130

Pick 66: 437 points

Pick 130: 69 points



Net win: 368 points

That's how you should score the underrated/overrated write-ups.

(I just picked two winners - I'm sure I have negatives too).

If someone wants to go and evaluate the staff, by all means have at it - I'm just giving you the way to do it.

 

[TenTimes]

I'd have to give it some thought to even decide what exactly 34.7% means in terms of anything useful.By that I mean, is it good or bad? What kind of correct hit rate should we expect in the 4+ votes crowd which means that 19% of staffers thought those players were undervalued while 81% of staffers thought they were correctly valued or were overvalued? What kind of hit rate should we expect when it was 57% of staffers (12 out of 21) that thought the player was undervalued?

Any hit rate below 50% is worse than random guessing. It's a binary option, overvalued/undervalued or not.

Or unlucky. Fantasy football is based on luck which is why I will never understand paying for another man's guess, other than to make you sleep better at night.

 

[CalBear]

I'd have to give it some thought to even decide what exactly 34.7% means in terms of anything useful.By that I mean, is it good or bad? What kind of correct hit rate should we expect in the 4+ votes crowd which means that 19% of staffers thought those players were undervalued while 81% of staffers thought they were correctly valued or were overvalued? What kind of hit rate should we expect when it was 57% of staffers (12 out of 21) that thought the player was undervalued?

Any hit rate below 50% is worse than random guessing. It's a binary option, overvalued/undervalued or not.

Or unlucky. Fantasy football is based on luck which is why I will never understand paying for another man's guess, other than to make you sleep better at night.

Fantasy football is not based on luck. A monkey choosing from a list of all NFL players would lose every time, whereas in a real game of luck, the monkey would have just as good a chance as you or I. However, a monkey choosing overvalued/undervalued players from the already-generated FBG ratings list would have improved on this list.

 

[David Yudkin]

The correct way to "score" a result of this would be to look at the ADP.

I'm sure I was a mixed bag on results, but here's an example (probably my best call):

Big Ben - Underrated

ADP:89 (QB13)

ADP on 9/7: 86

He finished as QB3 on a PPG basis.

ADP for QB3 on 9/7: 19

To evaluate the difference, just use a pick calculator:

Pick 86: 268 points

Pick 19: 1076 points



Net win: 808 points

As for scoring a player you label Overrated, just go the other direction:

Lee Evans - Overrated

ADP:66 (WR25)

He finished as WR42 on a PPG basis.

ADP for WR42:130

Pick 66: 437 points

Pick 130: 69 points



Net win: 368 points

That's how you should score the underrated/overrated write-ups.

(I just picked two winners - I'm sure I have negatives too).

If someone wants to go and evaluate the staff, by all means have at it - I'm just giving you the way to do it.

I'm not sure I'd agree with the PPG argument. For me, anyway, I picked players for better or for worse on how likely they were to play in 16 games. So if I felt like if they would have a tough time staying healthy (Bush, Wetsbrook, etc.), then that's why I said they were overrated.I think a better excerise for who would be over or underrated is to not look at a player's ranking but at his projections for the upcoming season. That way we would be coming him to a data point instead of a bandwidth of rankings that a few points here or there could dramatically change a yearend ranking.

If that were the metric we used, taking Big Ben as a value pick would have been a great pick because he scored far greater than he was expected to.

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

The correct way to "score" a result of this would be to look at the ADP.

I'm sure I was a mixed bag on results, but here's an example (probably my best call):

Big Ben - Underrated

ADP:89 (QB13)

ADP on 9/7: 86

He finished as QB3 on a PPG basis.

ADP for QB3 on 9/7: 19

To evaluate the difference, just use a pick calculator:

Pick 86: 268 points

Pick 19: 1076 points



Net win: 808 points

As for scoring a player you label Overrated, just go the other direction:

Lee Evans - Overrated

ADP:66 (WR25)

He finished as WR42 on a PPG basis.

ADP for WR42:130

Pick 66: 437 points

Pick 130: 69 points



Net win: 368 points

That's how you should score the underrated/overrated write-ups.

(I just picked two winners - I'm sure I have negatives too).

If someone wants to go and evaluate the staff, by all means have at it - I'm just giving you the way to do it.

I'm not sure I'd agree with the PPG argument. For me, anyway, I picked players for better or for worse on how likely they were to play in 16 games. So if I felt like if they would have a tough time staying healthy (Bush, Wetsbrook, etc.), then that's why I said they were overrated.I think a better excerise for who would be over or underrated is to not look at a player's ranking but at his projections for the upcoming season. That way we would be coming him to a data point instead of a bandwidth of rankings that a few points here or there could dramatically change a yearend ranking.

If that were the metric we used, taking Big Ben as a value pick would have been a great pick because he scored far greater than he was expected to.

I've never understood NOT looking at a PPG basis. You always draft depth, so a player's value is based upon how much he exceeds the "next man up". If I take Westbrook knowing that he's likely to miss 4-6 games but I know that 10-12 games he'll exceed my bench guy by X, it's up to me to decide if that is worth it. To say it another way, I don't take a zero every game Westbrook misses - someone will be in that lineup spot. So Westbrook's true value is his PPG plus some baseline bench guy for the number of contests he misses.

 

[David Yudkin]

The correct way to "score" a result of this would be to look at the ADP.

I'm sure I was a mixed bag on results, but here's an example (probably my best call):

Big Ben - Underrated

ADP:89 (QB13)

ADP on 9/7: 86

He finished as QB3 on a PPG basis.

ADP for QB3 on 9/7: 19

To evaluate the difference, just use a pick calculator:

Pick 86: 268 points

Pick 19: 1076 points



Net win: 808 points

As for scoring a player you label Overrated, just go the other direction:

Lee Evans - Overrated

ADP:66 (WR25)

He finished as WR42 on a PPG basis.

ADP for WR42:130

Pick 66: 437 points

Pick 130: 69 points



Net win: 368 points

That's how you should score the underrated/overrated write-ups.

(I just picked two winners - I'm sure I have negatives too).

If someone wants to go and evaluate the staff, by all means have at it - I'm just giving you the way to do it.

I'm not sure I'd agree with the PPG argument. For me, anyway, I picked players for better or for worse on how likely they were to play in 16 games. So if I felt like if they would have a tough time staying healthy (Bush, Wetsbrook, etc.), then that's why I said they were overrated.I think a better excerise for who would be over or underrated is to not look at a player's ranking but at his projections for the upcoming season. That way we would be coming him to a data point instead of a bandwidth of rankings that a few points here or there could dramatically change a yearend ranking.

If that were the metric we used, taking Big Ben as a value pick would have been a great pick because he scored far greater than he was expected to.

I've never understood NOT looking at a PPG basis. You always draft depth, so a player's value is based upon how much he exceeds the "next man up". If I take Westbrook knowing that he's likely to miss 4-6 games but I know that 10-12 games he'll exceed my bench guy by X, it's up to me to decide if that is worth it. To say it another way, I don't take a zero every game Westbrook misses - someone will be in that lineup spot. So Westbrook's true value is his PPG plus some baseline bench guy for the number of contests he misses.

I agree PPG is more important, but for the purpose of the Over/Under article, it's based on how players rank at the end of the year based on total points scored. So IMO we should pick players based on how many total points they score. Since FBG will produce projections, to me at least, it makes more sense to go over/under on total projected points.As others have pointed out, if a WR ranked 28th but had an ADP of 33rd, that's usually not that far off. But if a RB is projected for 6th and ends up 3rd that could be a HUGE point differential in only a handful of spots.

Using PPG for this sets up issues in that if a guy only plays in 10 games but averages more points he can be used for EITHER side of the argument (well, he was undervalued because his PPG was high - OR - given his injury history it was clear he wouldn't play 16 games). Both sides have a valid case and I do agree I would rather have the higher PPG on my team instead of the usually lower scoring guy that happened to play every game and ranked higher.

I guess overall if they wanted us to pick guys based on PPG then they would tell us that . . .

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Fine - score it either way, but the method still works.

Take the ADP of the player at the time (or the 9/7 list from FBG) and see how they finished.

Use a Pick Calc to find the value of the 2 ADPs and subtract to get a score.

Repeat for each choice.

That'd be an interesting result.

I might do that for a 2010 article, who knows.

 

[GregR_2]

I'd have to give it some thought to even decide what exactly 34.7% means in terms of anything useful.

By that I mean, is it good or bad? What kind of correct hit rate should we expect in the 4+ votes crowd which means that 19% of staffers thought those players were undervalued while 81% of staffers thought they were correctly valued or were overvalued? What kind of hit rate should we expect when it was 57% of staffers (12 out of 21) that thought the player was undervalued?

Any hit rate below 50% is worse than random guessing. It's a binary option, overvalued/undervalued or not.

Or unlucky. Fantasy football is based on luck which is why I will never understand paying for another man's guess, other than to make you sleep better at night.

Fantasy football is not based on luck. A monkey choosing from a list of all NFL players would lose every time, whereas in a real game of luck, the monkey would have just as good a chance as you or I. However, a monkey choosing overvalued/undervalued players from the already-generated FBG ratings list would have improved on this list.

David Dodds walks up to you and says: "Here's a list of 10 players.

80% of our staff think these players are at their correct ADP.

20% of our staff think they will outperform their ADP."

Assume for the sake of argument that you believe that the staffers are all well informed people and as knowledgeable about football and FF as you can realistically find.

With that info in mind, where would you place an over/under line on how many players of those 10 outperform their ADP? Such that either side of the line is an even money bet?

Now same situation, except the staff recommendations are reversed. 20% of staff thinking they are at a correct ADP. 80% think they will outperform it.

Where do you move the betting line for this situation compared to the last?

 

[David Yudkin]

Since there has been some interest on the subject, I went and researched the players that I picked over the years in this article to see if my choices were good, bad, or indifferent. Like this year, there were many that were close either way (which really doesn't show much of anything). Here was my track record of what I would call big hits or big misses. I only listed the ones that fell into either a clear hit or a clear miss. I don't have an exact criteria for what that means, but once you see the list it should give people a general idea. The first number is the ADP, the second number is the actual rank. 2007's article did not have the ADP we used at the time, so I looked up the MFL ADPs at the start of the season (so the ADPs changed some from the time we wrote th article).

2009 HITS

UNDERVALUED: Favre 25/3, Gore 9/5, Benson 31/16, Driver 36/18, Mason 39/17

OVERVALUED: Ryan 9/19, Westbrook 9/61, Ward 26/50, Bush 23/36, Evans 24/35, Crabtree 43/64, RWilliams 16/37

2009 MISSES

UNDERVALUED: Portis 14/53, Hightower 40/22, Avery 32/47

OVERVALUED: None

2009 RATIO: 12 hits to 3 misses

__________________________________

2008 HITS

UNDERVALUED: Rivers 16/3, TJones 23/5, DWilliams 33/1, Bruce 49/25, Mason 38/22, TGonzalez 4/1

OVERVALUED: Leinart 22/48, Palmer 5/41, Brady 1/60, Barber 6/16, McGahee 13/32, LJohnson 10/29, BEdwards 4/36, MHarrison 22/42, SRice 41/90, Shockey 7/27

(I was a year off on my Ray Rice selection.)

2008 MISSES

UNDERVALUED: Hasselbeck 9/36, Burleson 35/131, Chambers 27/52, Jennings 17/4, CalJohnson 19/3

OVERVALUED: None

2008 RATIO: 16 hits to 5 misses

____________________________________

2007 HITS

UNDERVALUED: Favre 16/8, Witten 8/1, FTaylor 32/18,

OVERVALUED: Bush 9/24, Turner 41/73, Furrey 45/65, AJohnson 15/22, DBennett 46/74

2007 MISSES

UNDERVALUED: McNair 24/46, AGreen 26/64, JJones 29/44, DDriver 16/30, Glenn 34/181, DGraham 20/34

OVERVALUED: None

2007 RATIO: 8 hits to 6 misses

_____________________________________

2006 HITS

UNDERVALUED: Kitna 25/6, Gore 37/4, CTaylor 21/12, AGreen 31/15, Bruce 45/25, TGlenn 37/20, JWalker 16/9, Winslow 12/6

OVERVALUED: Brady 3/7, KCurtis 42/60, VDavis 9/23, Fitzgerald 4/24

2006 MISSES

UNDERVALUED: ABrooks 17/41

OVERVALUED: McAllister 27/13, BEdwards 39/26, Troupe 16/42

2006 RATIO: 12 hits to 4 misses

______________________________________

2005 HITS

UNDERVALUED: Dunn 28/12, RJohnson 15/7, Kennison 41/18, Driver 29/13, RSmith 34/16

OVERVALUED: Vick 4/12, McGahee 5/13, AJohnson 7/46, RMoss 1/15

2005 MISSES

UNDERVALUED: None

OVERVALUED: Brees 13/7

2005 RATIO: 9 hits to 1 miss

Adding all 5 years together: 57 hits to 19 misses (75%).

Obviously there were many other picks that were very near their ADPs and those are not counted here, but the for the ones that turned out a fair amount higher or lower I have done far better than a monkey pulling names out of a hat.

 

[Joe T]

Obviously there were many other picks that were very near their ADPs and those are not counted here, but the for the ones that turned out a fair amount higher or lower I have done far better than a monkey pulling names out of a hat.

In conclusion, maybe you should write the over/under valued articles alone rather than go through some sort of weird staff voting system that seems to have an undesired outcome.

 

[BassNBrew]

The first number is the ADP, the second number is the actual rank. 2007's article did not have the ADP we used at the time, so I looked up the MFL ADPs at the start of the season (so the ADPs changed some from the time we wrote th article).

2009 HITS

UNDERVALUED: Favre 25/3, Gore 9/5, Benson 31/16, Driver 36/18, Mason 39/17

OVERVALUED: Ryan 9/19, Westbrook 9/61, Ward 26/50, Bush 23/36, Evans 24/35, Crabtree 43/64, RWilliams 16/37

2009 MISSES

UNDERVALUED: Portis 14/53, Hightower 40/22, Avery 32/47

OVERVALUED: None

2009 RATIO: 12 hits to 3 misses

__________________________________

2008 HITS

UNDERVALUED: Rivers 16/3, TJones 23/5, DWilliams 33/1, Bruce 49/25, Mason 38/22, TGonzalez 4/1

OVERVALUED: Leinart 22/48, Palmer 5/41, Brady 1/60, Barber 6/16, McGahee 13/32, LJohnson 10/29, BEdwards 4/36, MHarrison 22/42, SRice 41/90, Shockey 7/27

(I was a year off on my Ray Rice selection.)

2008 MISSES

UNDERVALUED: Hasselbeck 9/36, Burleson 35/131, Chambers 27/52, Jennings 17/4, CalJohnson 19/3

OVERVALUED: None

2008 RATIO: 16 hits to 5 misses

looks like to me that your dang good at predicting injuries and taking advantage of lagging adp.Farve - His adp was lagging solely based on being "retired" at the time. While he did exceed expectations, I'm not sure who would have picked him based on real time adp once the situation was clear.

Mason - Again, his adp was heavily influenced by retirement talk. Your article always lags the adp so you get the benefit of fresh news.

Evans - adp was higher before the TO signing.

Crabtree - perfect example of why ppg is better. He finished at 45 on a ppg basis which is almost identical to where he listed. In reality this was a miss for anyone who used the article for an August draft as once he was up and going he performed closer to WR30 numbers.

Portis - The injury bug bit you.

Hightower - Wasn't a miss for you unless you put him in the wrong place. Regardless, he exceed expectation mostly on the Wells holdout. The later we got in the year, the more he performed to adp.

Avery - Who knows. Injury bit you here.

2008 Hasselbeck/Burleson - Injuries made these good calls.

Not picking on you as you made some great calls. However I don't think injuries (especially when we're talking about guys with no history of injury) should be a valid reason for a good or bad call. I'm also not a fan of beating up on out of date adps.