CP - loved this thread for the last couple months. Will you be doing a post-draft update?
You do know that the expression "break a leg" isn't meant to be taken literally, right? Looking forward to your comments. Any schlub can make a list of players, but it's the "why" that's ever so important when trying to decide how much you want to weigh those rankings when developing your own. Thanks for the good work!and then a leg injury and Doctor / hospital time
Thanks.Was a high ankle sprain and some circulation issues, but it's under control now.I spent more time than I'd hoped with the FBG rookie rankings tonight (it's sort of a time consuming process when you're inputting the first pass), so the shark pool update will be up tomorrow.If my leg doesn't fall off.You do know that the expression "break a leg" isn't meant to be taken literally, right? Looking forward to your comments. Any schlub can make a list of players, but it's the "why" that's ever so important when trying to decide how much you want to weigh those rankings when developing your own. Thanks for the good work!and then a leg injury and Doctor / hospital time
If you're looking at the the list in the post #1, that's not updated post-draft yet. When I post the fresh rankings he'll be WR43 in tier 4.I think 49ers rookie WR A.J. Jenkins could be moved up a bit. Not saying he'll be a #1 but I invision him as a decent #2 eventually with a QB other than Smith. I think after this year, who know maybe this year, he'll be a starter over Manningham & Moss if he's still there. Think the kid has potential but a lot of work to do,. If he puts in the effort and a little more I think there's a good possibility he can be very successful and I like his upside. Of course I'm wanting to see another QB in S.F. Who knows, with all the extra picks they got this year from trades maybe Jim Harbaugh goes out and gets Matt Barkley. I think Jenkins development decreases though as long as Smith stays the starter. Give A.J. a franchise QB and he'll make good use of him & vice-versa, whomever that is.Nice list though CP.I saved it to my favorites list. Thanks for all the work on it.
CP, did you ever get back to this? I was enjoying this discussion and figured the dust may have settled enough from tax season and your move to FBG to get back to it.I've run out of time tonight, other things I need to do before bed. I gotcha, and will follow up tomorrow.CP, great thread and this latest post, which I clipped, is one of many great posts from you in this thread.Focusing on the window element, I just wanted to make sure it is clear what I mean. It is of course typically the case that a player with high level talent who is 23 carries more long term value than a player with high level talent who is 33. The real question is how the different elements, like short term vs. long term value, are emphasized in rankings.To illustrate with an example, one might think Brees has 3 excellent seasons left, followed by two good seasons. Maybe something like this:2012: top 42013: top 42014: top 82015: top 102016: top 12And perhaps, even being high on Luck, one might think he will take a couple seasons to become a top fantasy performer, even if he ultimately becomes elite. Maybe something like this:2012: top 202013: top 152014: top 102015: top 82016: top 5If one projects these kinds of progressions, is it unreasonable to prefer Brees, pushing for near term championships? Particularly for one who is confident in his ability to draft/acquire value players down the line?This partly depends on scoring system, state of roster, etc. But IMO it also partly depends on philosophy.Note: I am not arguing for ranking Brees over Luck, just trying to illustrate what I was trying to get at earlier.Excellent discussion.To be completely honest, choosing and sticking with an evaluation window is something I've never forced myself to really take a stand on, and I know I've sort of dodged this question from you before. I'm still unclear whether it's a big weakness of mine not to choose and stick with 3 years, 5 years, rest of career etc., or if it's better to be more flexible and circumstantial. If I'm building a rocket to the moon I do things precisely by the book or people die. But, if I'm admiring paintings at the Louvre I know paint-by-number stuff this ain't. So, my answer is sort of "it depends." I know "it depends" isn't much of an answer, but that's what I've usually fallen back on, unsatisfying as it is. There are little projects I still want to get to that may help narrow down how much I can believe this to be science and how much art, and I'm interested to know if I'll come up with a less hazy idea of evaluation windows if / when I ever complete these projects.
I would actually put Schaub a tier below. At 31, age is certainly a concern. For guys that don't miss big portions of the season 3 out of 5 time then 31 isn't that old, but I think his best years are in the past. This season is a "show me" year, but I think he shows that he's an NFL starter for only a year or two more. Pretty ballsy ranking Luck above Cam. I don't agree with it, but I like it.On your QB rankings, a few comments:2. I still think you are low on Schaub. You have mentioned in this thread that you think the Texans have become a running team... but in 2010 they had an elite rushing attack and still attempted 574 passes (#10 in the league). It seems risky to me to draw any conclusions from last season, when they had their 3rd string QB start the last 5 regular season games and missed Andre Johnson for 9+ games. Schaub is going to turn 31 this summer, so age isn't a concern. I have a very hard time understanding ranking Palmer higher, and I wouldn't rank Flacco or Tannehill over him either.
Schaub is NOTHING special. Palmer has better WR's and so does Flacco. Tanny over Schaub in dynasty just because he's younger and actually has some potential left.I would actually put Schaub a tier below. At 31, age is certainly a concern. For guys that don't miss big portions of the season 3 out of 5 time then 31 isn't that old, but I think his best years are in the past. This season is a "show me" year, but I think he shows that he's an NFL starter for only a year or two more. Pretty ballsy ranking Luck above Cam. I don't agree with it, but I like it.On your QB rankings, a few comments:2. I still think you are low on Schaub. You have mentioned in this thread that you think the Texans have become a running team... but in 2010 they had an elite rushing attack and still attempted 574 passes (#10 in the league). It seems risky to me to draw any conclusions from last season, when they had their 3rd string QB start the last 5 regular season games and missed Andre Johnson for 9+ games. Schaub is going to turn 31 this summer, so age isn't a concern. I have a very hard time understanding ranking Palmer higher, and I wouldn't rank Flacco or Tannehill over him either.
Actually, I'd argue that he's one of the most underrated QBs in the NFL. Certainly a lot more efficient than Palmer and Flacco.Schaub is NOTHING special.
IMO, when he's healthy he's as good (in the regular season obviously) as Eli.Actually, I'd argue that he's one of the most underrated QBs in the NFL. Certainly a lot more efficient than Palmer and Flacco.Schaub is NOTHING special.
There is a very strong bias towards fresh faces in his rankings.Great job, Bruce. I can't quibble with the individual rankings. Philosophically, though, I believe you generally short-change difference-makers with 2-3 dominant seasons left in favor of younger players who may never reach that level at any point in their careers. The primary directive is to wave as many banners as possible, not build the prettiest young roster.
I agree with you pretty strongly as far as how I tend to build my teams, but in their role as a "universal trade value list" youth-centric rankings have their place. In my experience most dynasty owners DO over-value youth to a greater or lesser degree.Once you've played FF for a while, you tend to realize that in H2H playoffs anything can and often does happen. Playing to reach the playoffs every year is definitely a + EV play over always trying to have the "should be dominant in two years" roster.Great job, Bruce. I can't quibble with the individual rankings. Philosophically, though, I believe you generally short-change difference-makers with 2-3 dominant seasons left in favor of younger players who may never reach that level at any point in their careers. The primary directive is to wave as many banners as possible, not build the prettiest young roster.
The key in dynasty I have found is MOST dyno players over value youth/picks. I use it to my advantage.There is a very strong bias towards fresh faces in his rankings.Great job, Bruce. I can't quibble with the individual rankings. Philosophically, though, I believe you generally short-change difference-makers with 2-3 dominant seasons left in favor of younger players who may never reach that level at any point in their careers. The primary directive is to wave as many banners as possible, not build the prettiest young roster.
Tend to call the shiny and new roster owners "easy money." They don't play to win in any year even though they are telling themselves that they are.The key in dynasty I have found is MOST dyno players over value youth/picks. I use it to my advantage.There is a very strong bias towards fresh faces in his rankings.Great job, Bruce. I can't quibble with the individual rankings. Philosophically, though, I believe you generally short-change difference-makers with 2-3 dominant seasons left in favor of younger players who may never reach that level at any point in their careers. The primary directive is to wave as many banners as possible, not build the prettiest young roster.
My sentiments exactly. Especially draft picks beyond the top-5 in a given year. Laugh your way to another title with Antonio Gates and Steve Smith this year while other guys overvalue Jermaine Gresham, Brent Celek, Antonio Brown, and the rookie WRs. I'm not saying all older players are undervalued. Most aren't even worth the roster space. It's the aging players that can still be expected to give you an upperhand every week for the next 2-3 years that are Dynasty gems.Tend to call the shiny and new roster owners "easy money." They don't play to win in any year even though they are telling themselves that they are.The key in dynasty I have found is MOST dyno players over value youth/picks. I use it to my advantage.
Seconded.Just wanted to say this is a fantastic thread. Rigorous debate, alternative hypotheses and solid writing skills from the OP. A joy to read and follow. Nice job CP.
Any chance this thread gets revived?
His rankings are now pay content. Haven't looked in a while, but they were being updated fairly often during the season.Any chance this thread gets revived?
also good to look at to see how perception changes in just 1 seasonHis rankings are now pay content. Haven't looked in a while, but they were being updated fairly often during the season.Any chance this thread gets revived?
Good call here on Stafford.I would much rather have Cam than Stafford. Cam had a higher yards per attempt this year despite being a rookie and he's a vastly superior athlete and physical specimen. Cam is a top 10 overall dynasty player for me and a guy who belongs in any first tier. I will not be drafting Stafford at his ADP this offseason. I think he's being treated like an elite QB without having the stats to back it up. I realize that TDs and yards are all that most people look at. I've always thought that completion percentage, yards per attempt, and QB rating collectively provided a better indicator of actual QB quality. Stafford hasn't been elite in these areas. I think the hype for him is a more exaggerated version of what happened with Palmer and Cutler in years past (although, to be fair, his numbers are probably more impressive than theirs ever were). He might justify his perceived value in time, but...he might not. I've seen lots of young QBs come in, play reasonably well, and never get any better. Assuming that one of them is going to take the next step has been a common mistake in recent years (see: Vince Young, Matt Leinart, Jay Cutler, Sam Bradford, Matt Ryan, Joe Flacco - all considered unanimous top 10 dynasty QBs at one point or another).
Gresham outscored Gates and SS outscored Brown (total difference of about 20 points), but I imagine most owners would prefer to own Gresham/Brown over Gates/Smith this year.My sentiments exactly. Especially draft picks beyond the top-5 in a given year. Laugh your way to another title with Antonio Gates and Steve Smith this year while other guys overvalue Jermaine Gresham, Brent Celek, Antonio Brown, and the rookie WRs.Tend to call the shiny and new roster owners "easy money." They don't play to win in any year even though they are telling themselves that they are.The key in dynasty I have found is MOST dyno players over value youth/picks.
I use it to my advantage.
I'm not saying all older players are undervalued. Most aren't even worth the roster space. It's the aging players that can still be expected to give you an upperhand every week for the next 2-3 years that are Dynasty gems.
AND...he just updated QB and TE rankings on 3/16, and his RB and WR rankings are only about a month old.Nice to see new staff dynasty rankings every week or so by one of the dynasty contributors.See Bruce Hammond's entry on the FBG Dynasty ratings. He made the big time.