Dodd's DEF projections held undue powers of persuasion over me (1 Viewer)

[Judge Smails]

In our league, prior to today, the Broncos D/ST had scored 37 points ALL YEAR. 2 defense were lower than that. 1) Lions 2) Rams (and only by 3 points).

Nuff said. I questioned this from the start. Broncos can't stop the run. They get no pass rush. Bailey was out again I believe. Easy to play armchair QB, but this was a horrible pick.

 

[CletiusMaximus]

OK, I can understand nudging Denver's DEF up a little this week playing the Raiders at home, but how do you make them a top 5 DEF play for the week? I got the VIKS on my bench with 26 and the Bills with 15. I start Denver because I was in a must win situation and I get -4. Granted, I was stupid for starting Denver's DEF and it's my own fault, but when you are staring at them as the 3rd best DEF in your scoring system according to Lineup Dominator, it's hard to ignore.

You agreed with Dodds enough before the game to start em! Don't whine now.<--- coming from a guy that benched Min's Def (26 points) for Denver's (-1 point) and it may cost me a playoff spot as well.



If you wanted Dodds to make all your decisions for ya, why even play the game?

I love morons who make these statements.I pay because I have no time to make my own spreadsheets. I own a business and work a fulltime job.

THAT'S why you pay, so you don't have to sit down for hours each week and do the work. A lot of people have very busy lives and pay the fee and expect good results. This year has been a bad year for FBG projections.

If I buy a radio I expect it to work, not have to tinker with it for hours at a time to get it to work.

What? FBG is working as a prediction site ala projections and at best they are a 3rd party if not 4th or 5th because of the lack of "insider" information. People complaining about the accuracy of projections probably sued Miss Cleo as well.

You're right to a point, but still, you are paying money and you should expect decent results. All I'm saying is the results this year are definitely not very good. Check out my record.

I use FBG just as Mr Pack does - basically to make my decisions for me because I have neither the time nor the inclination to do the work myself, but still want to field a competitive fantasy team. Frankly, its a bit surprising to me to read about people who do a ton of projections and such yet still pay for a subscription here. In any event, I've done great this season following FBG draft and weekly starting advice to the letter. This week for example I picked up R. Lindell based on Herman's ranking and started Cassel over Thigpen, all based on the cheetsheets that I reviewed yesterday. Thanks guys!

 

[PhilLynott]

How is this three pages long??? I haven't read this whole rant but I will post an opinion. If you are not able to digest information and formulate your own opinion I have to be a little concerned as to why your handlers let you wander out alone. My own opinion, fantasy football is about drafting YOUR team, MANIPULATING that team, and gathering whatever information will help that team win. You do realize that a countless number of us saw the exact same ranking that you did and disregarded it because we thought it was BS. Run your own team and enjoy the high and lows that come with it.

 

[TitusIII]

The ranking was moronic, but so was following the advice...

In the future, just look at the Vegas over/under lines, and pick a team from a game they feel will be low-scoring...much better chance of success than following FBG's D rankings...and the Vegas logic is usually as sound as it gets...

 

[BigDave]

I think your expectation of what anyone can predict in FF is what got you in trouble here. You thought you were subscribing to a service that was going to give you a definative lineup each week based on their expertise. AND, that lineup would be better than your analysis because they're paid professionals. As you saw, they know slightly more than you, but not a whole lot more when it comes to predictions. It's all an estimated guess based on many many factors.

If you believe they know far more than you and you trust blindly, you just use their ranking and go with whatever results they garner. However, I think most look at the rankings and using their own judgement, decide if one team or player is ranked too high or too low and adjust their personal rankings accordingly. I guess most people saw Denver as a "reach" in this week's ranking and that sent up a red flare to warrant more investigation as to why it was that high. Like another commentor said, that should have lead you to research more articles, rankings and posts to justify the high ranking before submitting your lineup.

Sorry man, but FF and FF players are cruel sometimes. You got to learn to play with the big boys on this site!

 

[Dragon1952]

Anybody who picks the worst defense in the NFL, regardless of who they are playing, deserves what they get, plus some. It isn't rocket science for crying out loud. Here's a team that gives up an average of almost 28 pts per game for one thing. Only Detroit, San Francisco, St Louis and Kansas City have given up more points. And then, one way you score pts is for things called "turnovers", right? Denver's got 4 INTs and 6 fumble recoveries in 11 games. They've scored the 5th lowest FF points out of 32 teams. I also don't understand the logic in recommending Denver, but there were quite a few sites saying the same thing. Sometimes you've just got to question things

 

[teamroc]

It's funny how all these newly found "experts" weren't ragging on Dodds before today. If it was such a heinous projection, why did no one call it out?

Dodds did the same thing 3-4 weeks ago with SF. Had them ranked #2 for the week vs SEA. That was also a disaster.

Maybe we can get a set of forum poster projections each week, since they seem to be way ahead of the curve compared to FBGs.

 

[glumpy]

Granted, I was stupid for starting Denver's DEF and it's my own fault...

Then don't paste the blame on someone else in your flaming post title.

 

[-baller]

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...t=6&start=6

don't claim nobody told you.

 

[JHuber77]

My question is, why would you even trust Denver's DST after the season they have had thus far? If people could predict the future, we would all be Powerball winners

 

[ourmanflint]

I think your expectation of what anyone can predict in FF is what got you in trouble here. You thought you were subscribing to a service that was going to give you a definative lineup each week based on their expertise. AND, that lineup would be better than your analysis because they're paid professionals. As you saw, they know slightly more than you, but not a whole lot more when it comes to predictions. It's all an estimated guess based on many many factors. If you believe they know far more than you and you trust blindly, you just use their ranking and go with whatever results they garner. However, I think most look at the rankings and using their own judgement, decide if one team or player is ranked too high or too low and adjust their personal rankings accordingly. I guess most people saw Denver as a "reach" in this week's ranking and that sent up a red flare to warrant more investigation as to why it was that high. Like another commentor said, that should have lead you to research more articles, rankings and posts to justify the high ranking before submitting your lineup. Sorry man, but FF and FF players are cruel sometimes. You got to learn to play with the big boys on this site!

 

[PoolShark]

This discussion would not be complete if I didn't add that I may lose my game this week because I started NYG D over BUF because of FBG rankings. You suck FBG!

(actually, I started them because every time I've benched the Giants for what I think is a "better" Bills match up, it's cost me points, but if I admitted that I would be able to complain)

The bottom line is that defenses are a weekly crapshoot. Even a great D playing a horrid O isn't a guarantee of FF points, certainly not pre-game. Even a great D that completely stifles a horrid O on the field doesn't necessarily guarantee FF points.

A few wks ago, I started the Giants the week they completely dominated Seattle. I'm going off memory, but the final score was like 44-6 or something. The same week, the 49ers got smoked by NE (giving up 30+ points), but they almost doubled up the Giants in FF scoring. The 49ers got a bunch of turnovers & sacks and the Giants had none (or close to it). If you KNEW ahead of time exactly what those 2 final scores would be, which D would you start on your FF team?

 

[boilerdave]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

 

[BassNBrew]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

Bad posting

 

[joffer]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

Bad posting

 

[cvnpoka]

Rankings are like the futures market.

Farve was ranked something like 29 this week and ended up with 2 TDs and over 200 yards passing.

Delhomme had almost 300 yards passing and a TD, plus ran a TD in and he was ranked around 25 or so.

NOBODY>>>can predict what is going to happen in NFL games.

Yes, but it's alot easier to understand why someone is ranked high that usually scores high but then scores little, as well as someone who is ranked low and usually scores low, but then has an abnormally high game. It's hard to understand a team that normally scores very low, gets ranked very high, and then scores very low. Again, why so high of a ranking?

you are just being dense. its obv the broncos were ranked high bc they were playing oakland. oakland offense has been an atrocity all year. look at how other def have performed against oakland.and further, you are being incredibly results oriented. did anyone expect buffalo to score a few defensive tds? or minnesota? hell you even admitted in an earlier post that you dont take tds into acct.

players and teams underperform. it doesnt mean that the rankings are poor. its impossible to "predict" correctly at a high rate. i mean, who thought cutler would throw up a stink bomb at home vs oak? titans def got shredded this week. willie parker couldnt get thru the bengals def at home in smashmouth weather. lt only did average agaisnt a poor colts def missing bob sanders. frank gore did nothing vs a poor def. so many more.

are they bad plays? if san fran plays dallas next week are you gonna bench gore for fargas? are u gonna bench cutler from now on since he just got pummeled by weak team? is shaun hill a starter for putting up a decent game with mostly garbage time tds?

learn the meaning of results oriented and how it applies.

 

[cvnpoka]

The ranking was moronic, but so was following the advice...

In the future, just look at the Vegas over/under lines, and pick a team from a game they feel will be low-scoring...much better chance of success than following FBG's D rankings...and the Vegas logic is usually as sound as it gets...

im not sure if it will be much better than fbg advice but its a very solid strategy.

 

[Marvin88]

...just being dense.

I know you are but what am I?

Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board.

I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

 

[phthalatemagic]

I know you are but what am I? Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board. I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

Only in this case there really was a fire, but people like the movie too much to get out. So they'll tell you to shut up and enjoy the movie

 

[Marvin88]

There. I changed the title of the thread. That should calm things down!

 

[heidbrink]

If anybody really KNEW what was going to happen this hobby of ours would not be any fun.

 

[cvnpoka]

I know you are but what am I? Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board. I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

 

[gman74]

I always found it funny that you guys think Dodds and Bryant are football gods. Not to slam them but their projections and Cheatsheets are Avg to below Avg. They are not "Football Gods" they are good business people. They get you to plunk down 26.95 for their projections and never explain why they did what they did. When I get my weekly projections I briefly look at them and then send them to people I don't want to win.

 

[Marvin88]

I know you are but what am I? Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board. I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

I'm the one angry? Let's see - did I start bashing you or vice versa? Hmmmm....let me think.No, being dense is not realizing that no one can answer for Dodd's EXCEPT Dodd's as to why he ranked them where he did. So any answer given is not an answer unless it comes from the man himself. And I have heard no answer that I thought fully got to the heart of why he ranked them where he did.But you are insinuating that he only throws everything into a computer and gives no second thought to his picks every week. So it's really the computer I should be questioning. This is EXACTLY what I want to know because it would completely alter how I view his picks. If it is truly completely computer generated based solely on previous stats, then it should be less trusted and called computer picks and not Dodd picks.I am ready for someone to scream now "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

 

[cvnpoka]

No, being dense is not realizing that no one can answer for Dodd's EXCEPT Dodd's as to why he ranked them where he did. So any answer given is not an answer unless it comes from the man himself. And I have heard no answer that I thought fully got to the heart of why he ranked them where he did

huh?even if this was true, im not sure why you made this post then. does dodd post here? does he generally respond to ppl who bash him? sorry im not too familiar with the structure here. i would think an email would have been better. or, at least next time, make a note in your op that you are going to dismiss any answers to your question.

 

[gman74]

I know you are but what am I? Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board. I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

I'm the one angry? Let's see - did I start bashing you or vice versa? Hmmmm....let me think.No, being dense is not realizing that no one can answer for Dodd's EXCEPT Dodd's as to why he ranked them where he did. So any answer given is not an answer unless it comes from the man himself. And I have heard no answer that I thought fully got to the heart of why he ranked them where he did.But you are insinuating that he only throws everything into a computer and gives no second thought to his picks every week. So it's really the computer I should be questioning. This is EXACTLY what I want to know because it would completely alter how I view his picks. If it is truly completely computer generated based solely on previous stats, then it should be less trusted and called computer picks and not Dodd picks.I am ready for someone to scream now "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!"

You notice that Dodds is nowhere to be found on a 3 page thread about him. Maybe he does do rock,paper,scissors for the projections

 

[Chicago Hooligan]

ben stein told me to invest in merrill lynch who do i see about that

 

[ourmanflint]

I know you are but what am I?

Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board.

I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

This is the answer Marvin. You need not wait anymore for something better. Dodds' projections are simply a bunch of math playing off the stats from previous games and years. I doubt there's very much subjective or empirical data applied at all. That's probably why you get no explanation from him on any them. There is nothing to explain. I would expect most rankings or projections are like this other than possibly the pre-draft variety.

You are charged with the responsibility to apply the empirical and subjective data and your gut. Dodds is giving you the plain and simple math in all of his tools. He's doing the mundane dirty work for you so you can apply your FF genius (not a poke) to make the right call. I'm sure what Dodds would say is that given all the stats and factors that play into it, this is where Denver graded out this week. Pretty odd occurrence but its probably fairly accurate. If you're watching the games and reading the box scores and game summaries, you would probably know to place a big red asterik next to Denver in these rankings.

I just wish you could get straight answers like this up front when you ask a question instead of having to endure 12 pages of bashing. People seem to have a lot more time to bash than to answer a question intelligently.

 

[heidbrink]

ben stein told me to invest in merrill lynch who do i see about that

If you were smart you would go with either the The Amazing Kreskin , Uri Geller, or Chris Angel Mindfreak. Those guys are absolutely dominating their leagues with perfect drafts and linups each and every week....it's ALMOST unbelievable!

 

[joffer]

.... Dodds' projections are simply a bunch of math playing off the stats from previous games and years. I doubt there's very much subjective or empirical data applied at all. That's probably why you get no explanation from him on any them. There is nothing to explain. I would expect most rankings or projections are like this other than possibly the pre-draft variety. You are charged with the responsibility to apply the empirical and subjective data and your gut. Dodds is giving you the plain and simple math in all of his tools. He's doing the mundane dirty work for you so you can apply your FF genius (not a poke) to make the right call. I'm sure what Dodds would say is that given all the stats and factors that play into it, this is where Denver graded out this week. Pretty odd occurrence but its probably fairly accurate. If you're watching the games and reading the box scores and game summaries, you would probably know to place a big red asterik next to Denver in these rankings.

wow, a lucid thought. pretty good post, although i'm not sure what kind of "empirical" data you're looking for.

 

[Chaka]

This just in: The Bronco's defense sucks.

 

[Marvin88]

I know you are but what am I?

Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board.

I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

This is the answer Marvin. You need not wait anymore for something better. Dodds' projections are simply a bunch of math playing off the stats from previous games and years. I doubt there's very much subjective or empirical data applied at all. That's probably why you get no explanation from him on any them. There is nothing to explain. I would expect most rankings or projections are like this other than possibly the pre-draft variety.

You are charged with the responsibility to apply the empirical and subjective data and your gut. Dodds is giving you the plain and simple math in all of his tools. He's doing the mundane dirty work for you so you can apply your FF genius (not a poke) to make the right call. I'm sure what Dodds would say is that given all the stats and factors that play into it, this is where Denver graded out this week. Pretty odd occurrence but its probably fairly accurate. If you're watching the games and reading the box scores and game summaries, you would probably know to place a big red asterik next to Denver in these rankings.

I just wish you could get straight answers like this up front when you ask a question instead of having to endure 12 pages of bashing. People seem to have a lot more time to bash than to answer a question intelligently.

YEP! And this is pretty much what I have believed all along but wanted others to postulate and give an argument as to how someone could come to a legitimate DEN #3 rating for the week. Instead, I create a forum for neanderthals to try and figure their way out of paper bag.

 

[joffer]

YEP! And this is pretty much what I have believed all along but wanted others to postulate and give an argument as to how someone could come to a legitimate DEN #3 rating for the week.

which Twilight did.

 

[ourmanflint]

.... Dodds' projections are simply a bunch of math playing off the stats from previous games and years. I doubt there's very much subjective or empirical data applied at all. That's probably why you get no explanation from him on any them. There is nothing to explain. I would expect most rankings or projections are like this other than possibly the pre-draft variety. You are charged with the responsibility to apply the empirical and subjective data and your gut. Dodds is giving you the plain and simple math in all of his tools. He's doing the mundane dirty work for you so you can apply your FF genius (not a poke) to make the right call. I'm sure what Dodds would say is that given all the stats and factors that play into it, this is where Denver graded out this week. Pretty odd occurrence but its probably fairly accurate. If you're watching the games and reading the box scores and game summaries, you would probably know to place a big red asterik next to Denver in these rankings.

wow, a lucid thought. pretty good post, although i'm not sure what kind of "empirical" data you're looking for.

"empirical" as in information gained by observing events. The events in this case are the games. Dodds is giving you the math, the simple data that describes the events. He is even observing the events for you and telling you about them (although not in his rankings). But nothing will be able to replace you actually watching the games and observing for yourself and building your own internal data bank of knowledge about teams. Tough to do unless you have Sunday Ticket or you download all the games and watch them during the week. But this is going to be much more valuable then Dodds' rankings. However, it helps to look at Dodds' rankings to get a benchmark for what your senses are telling you.

 

[Dexter Manley]

To call Denver's defense bad is an insult to bad defenses everywhere. If I was forced to choose between taking a zero or starting Denver's D/ST against anyone, I would take the zero.

 

[PatsFanCT]

How is this three pages long??? I haven't read this whole rant but I will post an opinion. If you are not able to digest information and formulate your own opinion I have to be a little concerned as to why your handlers let you wander out alone. My own opinion, fantasy football is about drafting YOUR team, MANIPULATING that team, and gathering whatever information will help that team win. You do realize that a countless number of us saw the exact same ranking that you did and disregarded it because we thought it was BS. Run your own team and enjoy the high and lows that come with it.

Probably because a lot of people didn't read the whole thread and posted the exact same opinion as yours. it adds up.

 

[thatguy]

I know you are but what am I?

Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board.

I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

This is the answer Marvin. You need not wait anymore for something better. Dodds' projections are simply a bunch of math playing off the stats from previous games and years. I doubt there's very much subjective or empirical data applied at all. That's probably why you get no explanation from him on any them. There is nothing to explain. I would expect most rankings or projections are like this other than possibly the pre-draft variety.

You are charged with the responsibility to apply the empirical and subjective data and your gut. Dodds is giving you the plain and simple math in all of his tools. He's doing the mundane dirty work for you so you can apply your FF genius (not a poke) to make the right call. I'm sure what Dodds would say is that given all the stats and factors that play into it, this is where Denver graded out this week. Pretty odd occurrence but its probably fairly accurate. If you're watching the games and reading the box scores and game summaries, you would probably know to place a big red asterik next to Denver in these rankings.

I just wish you could get straight answers like this up front when you ask a question instead of having to endure 12 pages of bashing. People seem to have a lot more time to bash than to answer a question intelligently.

YEP! And this is pretty much what I have believed all along but wanted others to postulate and give an argument as to how someone could come to a legitimate DEN #3 rating for the week. Instead, I create a forum for neanderthals to try and figure their way out of paper bag.

Your original thread title claimed that you missed the playoffs because of Dodds.... I'm really not sure what you expected. If you want to point your finger, expect a bunch more fingers to get pointed too... right back at you. The pot and the kettle, they're both black ya know.

 

[thatguy]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

Bad posting

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.

 

[gman74]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

Bad posting

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.

If they had a tissue icon I would give you on for your nose so you could wipe the brown off it.

 

[Breesisdaman]

What does point to the shirt mean anyway and where did it come from?

 

[gman74]

Time 2 chime in Dodds

 

[thatguy]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

Bad posting

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.

If they had a tissue icon I would give you on for your nose so you could wipe the brown off it.

Yeah, clearly I'm in this to defend Dodds. I've called Dodds out plenty of times on these boards. I'm simply stating an opinion. Notice if you will that I said his methods had positives AND negatives. If you want to look at everything in black and white though, feel free. It's your pathetic life that you have to live, not mine.

 

[gman74]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

Bad posting

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.

If they had a tissue icon I would give you on for your nose so you could wipe the brown off it.

Yeah, clearly I'm in this to defend Dodds. I've called Dodds out plenty of times on these boards. I'm simply stating an opinion. Notice if you will that I said his methods had positives AND negatives. If you want to look at everything in black and white though, feel free. It's your pathetic life that you have to live, not mine.

You told me That Guy must be Dodds alias or his cousin witch one?

 

[Mr.Pack]

I know you are but what am I?

Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board.

I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

This is the answer Marvin. You need not wait anymore for something better. Dodds' projections are simply a bunch of math playing off the stats from previous games and years. I doubt there's very much subjective or empirical data applied at all. That's probably why you get no explanation from him on any them. There is nothing to explain. I would expect most rankings or projections are like this other than possibly the pre-draft variety.

You are charged with the responsibility to apply the empirical and subjective data and your gut. Dodds is giving you the plain and simple math in all of his tools. He's doing the mundane dirty work for you so you can apply your FF genius (not a poke) to make the right call. I'm sure what Dodds would say is that given all the stats and factors that play into it, this is where Denver graded out this week. Pretty odd occurrence but its probably fairly accurate. If you're watching the games and reading the box scores and game summaries, you would probably know to place a big red asterik next to Denver in these rankings.

I just wish you could get straight answers like this up front when you ask a question instead of having to endure 12 pages of bashing. People seem to have a lot more time to bash than to answer a question intelligently.

YEP! And this is pretty much what I have believed all along but wanted others to postulate and give an argument as to how someone could come to a legitimate DEN #3 rating for the week. Instead, I create a forum for neanderthals to try and figure their way out of paper bag.

Your original thread title claimed that you missed the playoffs because of Dodds.... I'm really not sure what you expected. If you want to point your finger, expect a bunch more fingers to get pointed too... right back at you. The pot and the kettle, they're both black ya know.

Way to read through the whole topic before spewing your crap. He already stated in the early stages of this thread that he took responsibility for the loss and wrote the original post off of emotion. He admitted it was only his fault. But I guess if you won't read the whole topic, ignorance sets in.

HTH

 

[hove]

 

[gman74]

I know you are but what am I?

Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board.

I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

This is the answer Marvin. You need not wait anymore for something better. Dodds' projections are simply a bunch of math playing off the stats from previous games and years. I doubt there's very much subjective or empirical data applied at all. That's probably why you get no explanation from him on any them. There is nothing to explain. I would expect most rankings or projections are like this other than possibly the pre-draft variety.

You are charged with the responsibility to apply the empirical and subjective data and your gut. Dodds is giving you the plain and simple math in all of his tools. He's doing the mundane dirty work for you so you can apply your FF genius (not a poke) to make the right call. I'm sure what Dodds would say is that given all the stats and factors that play into it, this is where Denver graded out this week. Pretty odd occurrence but its probably fairly accurate. If you're watching the games and reading the box scores and game summaries, you would probably know to place a big red asterik next to Denver in these rankings.

I just wish you could get straight answers like this up front when you ask a question instead of having to endure 12 pages of bashing. People seem to have a lot more time to bash than to answer a question intelligently.

YEP! And this is pretty much what I have believed all along but wanted others to postulate and give an argument as to how someone could come to a legitimate DEN #3 rating for the week. Instead, I create a forum for neanderthals to try and figure their way out of paper bag.

Your original thread title claimed that you missed the playoffs because of Dodds.... I'm really not sure what you expected. If you want to point your finger, expect a bunch more fingers to get pointed too... right back at you. The pot and the kettle, they're both black ya know.

Way to read through the whole topic before spewing your crap. He already stated in the early stages of this thread that he took responsibility for the loss and wrote the original post off of emotion. He admitted it was only his fault. But I guess if you won't read the whole topic, ignorance sets in.

HTH

 

[-baller]

lol at title change.

title changing is gutless.

 

[thatguy]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

Bad posting

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.

If they had a tissue icon I would give you on for your nose so you could wipe the brown off it.

Yeah, clearly I'm in this to defend Dodds. I've called Dodds out plenty of times on these boards. I'm simply stating an opinion. Notice if you will that I said his methods had positives AND negatives. If you want to look at everything in black and white though, feel free. It's your pathetic life that you have to live, not mine.

You told me That Guy must be Dodds alias or his cousin witch one?

Um, first of all, WHICH one... You meant to say WHICH one. Not WITCH one. And second, well, there is no second.

 

[thatguy]

I know you are but what am I?

Man, there is some serious pent up anger on this board.

I feel like the guy that has screamed fire in a crowded theatre.

you have asked a bunch of times why denver was ranked so high. ppl have answered u plenty of times. yet you continue to question it. that is classic case of being dense. to be fair, i dont think you are truly stupid, i think you are simply being intentionally obtuse bc you are angry or just trolling.another thing to consider (im not sure on this as i dont follow the projections) is that dodds projections are heavily based on a statistical model or formula. in such cases, outliers are very possible, esp in a high variance, small sample size game like fantasy football.

This is the answer Marvin. You need not wait anymore for something better. Dodds' projections are simply a bunch of math playing off the stats from previous games and years. I doubt there's very much subjective or empirical data applied at all. That's probably why you get no explanation from him on any them. There is nothing to explain. I would expect most rankings or projections are like this other than possibly the pre-draft variety.

You are charged with the responsibility to apply the empirical and subjective data and your gut. Dodds is giving you the plain and simple math in all of his tools. He's doing the mundane dirty work for you so you can apply your FF genius (not a poke) to make the right call. I'm sure what Dodds would say is that given all the stats and factors that play into it, this is where Denver graded out this week. Pretty odd occurrence but its probably fairly accurate. If you're watching the games and reading the box scores and game summaries, you would probably know to place a big red asterik next to Denver in these rankings.

I just wish you could get straight answers like this up front when you ask a question instead of having to endure 12 pages of bashing. People seem to have a lot more time to bash than to answer a question intelligently.

YEP! And this is pretty much what I have believed all along but wanted others to postulate and give an argument as to how someone could come to a legitimate DEN #3 rating for the week. Instead, I create a forum for neanderthals to try and figure their way out of paper bag.

Your original thread title claimed that you missed the playoffs because of Dodds.... I'm really not sure what you expected. If you want to point your finger, expect a bunch more fingers to get pointed too... right back at you. The pot and the kettle, they're both black ya know.

Way to read through the whole topic before spewing your crap. He already stated in the early stages of this thread that he took responsibility for the loss and wrote the original post off of emotion. He admitted it was only his fault. But I guess if you won't read the whole topic, ignorance sets in.

HTH

Oh I read it all. We reap what we sow.

 

[gman74]

..but I also hate the 1.6 td crap..just call it 1 td or 2, there is no such thing as 1.6, and what winds up happening is that you have 15 players ranked within a point or 2 of each other, which makes the rankings useless. I'd rather them rate players in tiers each week, than give me arbitrary garbage numbers...

Bad posting

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.

If they had a tissue icon I would give you on for your nose so you could wipe the brown off it.

Yeah, clearly I'm in this to defend Dodds. I've called Dodds out plenty of times on these boards. I'm simply stating an opinion. Notice if you will that I said his methods had positives AND negatives. If you want to look at everything in black and white though, feel free. It's your pathetic life that you have to live, not mine.

You told me That Guy must be Dodds alias or his cousin witch one?

Um, first of all, WHICH one... You meant to say WHICH one. Not WITCH one. And second, well, there is no second.

lol huh what put down the meds JR