ourmanflint
Footballguy
dude that avatar is priceless. makes me chuckle everytime i see it.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Dodd's DEF projections held undue powers of persuasion over me (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Marvin88
- Start date
roadkill1292
Footballguy
-baller
Footballguy
<<<<< who is that guy, anyway?does anybody have any idea who I am?
Chaka
Footballguy
Eddie "Up your butt, Jobu" Harris?
gman74
Footballguy
Looks like the Tuna 40 lbs ago
I thought Twilight did a pretty nice job in breaking down where the Denver ranking might have been born from......but seriously--cut the other 2 and roll w/MinnyA lesson learned the hard way. Still doesn't answer my question though.Dude Marvin. You should have asked yourself, "Why is Denver ranked so high?" Before you started them, instead of after. Since you admit yourself you couldn't find a reason, you could have saved yourself.
oh, that's right...
Last edited by a moderator:
glumpy
breeze
I think it was appropriate:
glumpy said:Then don't paste the blame on someone else in your flaming post title.
glumpy
breeze
I can think of a couple reasons which might have influenced the rankings:#1. In my league, run by RTSports, they breakdown defensive rankings by position. Oakland is #24, allowing a high amount of points to other defenses within our scoring system. Granted our scoring system is unusual, and doesn't account for opposing team points or yards.A lesson learned the hard way. Still doesn't answer my question though.Dude Marvin. You should have asked yourself, "Why is Denver ranked so high?" Before you started them, instead of after. Since you admit yourself you couldn't find a reason, you could have saved yourself.
#2. With a quick check of points scored off NFL.com--Oakland has scored the third fewest points in the league. That would suggest that in more standard defensive scoring systems the opposing defenses would benefit.
Without knowing the exact parameters of how these rankings are reached, I would suggest that this is a matter of matchups--which in this case looked real good for Denver. It's not unreasonable--how many people here have posted in threads asking about matchup plays involving <<fill in the blank--Thigpen comes to mind>> over "guaranteed studs" like <<fill in the blank--Warner, maybe>>?!!
--or is that not a good example?
Problem I see with guessing actual TD numbers in a true coin flip is two fold. First you're artificially moving people up and down, hence separating them greatly in the rankings, when you really expect their probable numbers to be close. Secondly, once you do this, you still end up with logjams in the rankings, however the logs are shuffled differently.thatguy said:Doing the projections in probabilities instead of concrete numbers is good and bad. On the one hand, it is probably the most accurate way to actually project numbers, as we simply can't say with any sort of certainly if a player will score one TD or two, but we can say which outcome is more likely. On the other hand, it does lead to a cluster**ck of guys ranked very close to each other, and only really helps us in making lineup decisions if the guys we are choosing from are separated in the rankings by ten spots or more. Furthermore, I think people have to understand that Dodds is in fact using probabilities, lest they don't really understand what the numbers even mean. I for one like the way Dodds does it, because I think it's far more sophisticated than simply saying, this guy will score one TD, this guy 2, and this guy 3. I don't use his projections, but I still have respect for his methods. Still, some people would rather look at rankings and projections that are more cut and dry - player A will score 2 TDs and run for 150 yards, player B will score 1 TD and rush for 90 yards.Bad postinglive54 said:
Might as well brown my nose further. For those bashing the work of the staff around here, they seem to be able to beat the Shark Pool field at a better clip than shear luck would indicate in the leagues and contests spawned from these boards. Either they're luckier than most or maybe they do have a clue about the hobby.
Dragon1952
Footballguy
Since you asked.http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...=denver+defenseteamroc said:
Dragon1952
"Oakland isn't great, but they are far from the team Denver met in Week 1. The Raiders have huge payback for that game. If they can keep the score respectable, which I think they can, they can pound the ball, which would have been successful in the first match-up had they not had to abandon it. And Russell has improved. I do not like the Denver defense this week (or any week for that matter). In fact, I would choose the Oakland defense before I'd take Denver's."
millertyme1
Footballguy
I think there was a Denver thread previous to the week with the ranking & I was baffled by it and responded such. (Think I stated at least one of Fargas/McFadden would go over 100 yards....wouldn't of been shocked if both did). They can't stop the run or pass.
Denver is the worst defense in the league....and they have been for weeks upon weeks (even with DJ and Champ they were STILL amongst the league worst). I don't know what Dodds was thinking they'd suddenly stop someone.
To blame a single person for your decision (even as head scratching as it was) deserves a shirt.
Denver is the worst defense in the league....and they have been for weeks upon weeks (even with DJ and Champ they were STILL amongst the league worst). I don't know what Dodds was thinking they'd suddenly stop someone.
To blame a single person for your decision (even as head scratching as it was) deserves a shirt.
Chaka
Footballguy
To be fair the Raiders were a must-start-against-offense for all but two games this season.
After the thrashing they gave Oakland in week 1 and the fact that it looked like they have been getting even worse it was reasonable to think Denver would similarly dismantle them this week.
After the thrashing they gave Oakland in week 1 and the fact that it looked like they have been getting even worse it was reasonable to think Denver would similarly dismantle them this week.
Link to an impressively larger version of your avatar? TIA
Das Boot
Footballguy
Actually it was like you were the guy who screamed "Not My Fault!!!" in a FF forum where most people take pride in making their own decisions and wouldn't dream of blaming someone else for their coaching moves that backfired.
Wow. Anyway, I ask the community again... if Dodds and Bryant suck at their projections-- who out there, free or pay, is recognized as better?
Dragon1952
Footballguy
Denver had gotten worse anyway...not so sure about the Raiders.
Marvin88
Footballguy
You want to know something funny? OK, you guys are gonna laugh, right? See...well...you know...guess what happened? Well, like, ummmm I still had Drew Brees playing last night...and, well, he sort of like, well, ummmm...got me enough points to win my matchup in spite of Denver's DEF. Isn't that funny? Huh???
Wait a minute guys, put down those sticks!!!
Wait a minute guys, put down those sticks!!!
Chaka
Footballguy
The Raiders had gone 15 quarters without scoring an offensive TD before McFadden got his 1 yard plunge in the third quarter against Denver. Their last offensive TD was in week 8.The only reason the Raiders had not gotten worse was because they couldn't get any worse.Dragon1952 said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Couch Potato
Footballguy
I just wish people could give their opinions without being so mean about it. It's getting harder and harder to wade through posts here.
completely agree
