[Dynasty] Post Draft Rookie Rankings Top 24 (1 Viewer)

[EBF]

Continuing with the Robinson vs Lee debate.

In Robinson's biggest game of 2013 vs Ohio State, his numbers were inflated after they were blown out.

When Penn State was within 48 points of Ohio State, Robinson had 5 receptions for 48 yards 0 TD

When Penn State was outscored by 49 or more points of Ohio State, Robinson had 7 receptions for 125 yards 1 TD.

He went up against Armani Reeves at CB who played in only 3 games in 2013 with 10 tackles. Tyvis Powell was at safety who also appeared in only 3 games. Then almost got caught from behind on his TD play by 6-4 250 LB Joshua Perry who...you guessed it appeared in 3 games in 2013.

Who did Robinson play? His 100 yard games this year and rank in passing yards allowed per game defensively: Central Florida(73) , Indiana(122), Ohio St(118), Eastern Michigan(99), Illinois(64), Wisconsin(33), Nebraska(29), Syracuse(81).

Teams he didn't have 100 yard games on: Purdue(43), Kent State(30), Minnesota(39), Michigan(61). What's the theme here?

Jacksonville picked Lee before they picked Robinson(22 spots earlier in fact) for a reason. They like him more, period.

Robinson thrived against a variety of opponents. Xue posted this earlier and it caught my attention. It's a table designed to show how many of a WR prospect's big plays came against good corners.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BmZ3KppCEAAaUnt.png

The results show Robinson near the top of the group against top 100 corners and slightly above average against top 50 corners. I don't know what criteria they're using to determine who's a top 50 and a top 100 corner, but all the same it punches some holes in the idea that he only produced against minnows. As far as his schedule goes, you can only play the teams on your schedule. It's not any fault of his that he never came up against LSU, Alabama, FSU, or Oregon. Whether you're in the SEC or the Sun Belt, all you can do is thrive against whoever you get a chance to play.

Robinson certainly did that. He was very consistent last year. Penn State only played 12 games total and he still had 8 games of 100+ yards. His worst game of the season was 3 catches for 43 yards. He had one other game with 7 catches for 63 yards. He went for 80+ yards in every other game.

Isolating his performance against Ohio State doesn't make a lot of sense to me. For one thing, it's just one game and every WR has a bad game from time to time. Mike Evans had 4 catches for 51 yards against LSU and 4 catches for 8 yards against Missouri. Beyond that, I don't know if a blowout loss is really the best game to use when gauging a player's impact. Penn State lost that OSU game 63-14. They were down 42-7 at halftime and 56-7 by the end of the third quarter. To me this indicates a gross inequity in the talent level and performance of the two teams. Football is ultimately a TEAM game and when your team is losing every matchup on the field, it's probably that much harder for you to shine as an individual (which he eventually did anyway).

There are some compelling arguments against Robinson. He had a low TD rate and he ran a slow 40 time at the combine. On the balance though, college production is not an area where he has a lot of question marks. He was extremely productive and he did all of it as a 19 and 20 year old.

As far as Lee vs. Robinson goes, I agree that size and hands might be the only two main areas where A-Rob has an advantage over Lee. Those happen to be two of the most important traits for a WR though. Especially if you're talking about guys who go on to become elite FF contributors. 9 of the top 10 WRs last year were 6+ feet tall. Most of them by several inches. The average height of that group was probably a shade over 6'3".

That's my biggest problem with Lee, Beckham, and Cooks as FF commodities. Just based on their size alone, you can probably eliminate perennial top 10 WR upside from their range of career outcomes. Even if they pan out, you're likely looking at a ceiling somewhere along the lines of Wright/Cobb/Hilton. It makes an interesting debate when you weigh them against the 2nd round guys like Latimer, Robinson, and Adams who have more prototypical frames.

 

[Xue]

I don't see how you have Lee over Robinson. And Robinson is "raw"? Not any more than Lee. I was watching video of the Jags Rookie Mini-camp. It's Lee who's getting extra instruction on this routes.

You could tell that Lee was getting more instruction than Robinson at rookie camp, specific to route running even, based on internet videos?

I don't know what anyone's opinion of myself including my own have to do with the discussion at hand. I don't know what clairvoyance has to do with this either. Lee fanboys sure take things personal and resort to name-calling when someone has anything factual and correct to offer.

 

[SayWhat?]

I don't see how you have Lee over Robinson. And Robinson is "raw"? Not any more than Lee. I was watching video of the Jags Rookie Mini-camp. It's Lee who's getting extra instruction on this routes.

You could tell that Lee was getting more instruction than Robinson at rookie camp, specific to route running even, based on internet videos?

And THAT leads you to conclude, as you stated in your original post, that Lee is getting more instruction than Robinson on route running at rookie camp? Honestly? IT'S A FIVE MINUTE CLIP. Out of HOURS of rookie camp. That's a silly claim really.

Full disclosure: I own neither Lee or Robinson.

 

[Rhythmdoctor]

I don't see how you have Lee over Robinson. And Robinson is "raw"? Not any more than Lee. I was watching video of the Jags Rookie Mini-camp. It's Lee who's getting extra instruction on this routes.

Often times the players who receive the most attention from coaches are the players with the most upside. I'm not saying that Lee is better than A-Rob and I'm actually a Robinson guy (over Lee). I'm only pointing out that your example above doesn't necessarily support your argument that Robinson is the better WR.

 

[jurb26]

Xue has shown a consistent bias against Lee over the past several months. It's hard to take any of his comments on him seriously IMO. The condescending tone has also grown tiresome, calling anyone who disagrees with him a "fan boy." Unfortunately he's not the only poster to do this. Personally, I could care less about internet name calling or whatever. It just causes me to lose a bit of faith in that person as a credible source. I'm not sure why you guys bother to engage him on the topic to be honest.

 

[Xue]

I don't see how you have Lee over Robinson. And Robinson is "raw"? Not any more than Lee. I was watching video of the Jags Rookie Mini-camp. It's Lee who's getting extra instruction on this routes.

Often times the players who receive the most attention from coaches are the players with the most upside. I'm not saying that Lee is better than A-Rob and I'm actually a Robinson guy (over Lee). I'm only pointing out that your example above doesn't necessarily support your argument that Robinson is the better WR.

My argument isn't who is the better WR. My argument is that tdmills is knocking Robinson because he is "raw", yet Lee is given a pass, when in fact they are both "raw". Lee is definitely more raw.

 

[tdmills]

Continuing with the Robinson vs Lee debate.

In Robinson's biggest game of 2013 vs Ohio State, his numbers were inflated after they were blown out.

When Penn State was within 48 points of Ohio State, Robinson had 5 receptions for 48 yards 0 TD

When Penn State was outscored by 49 or more points of Ohio State, Robinson had 7 receptions for 125 yards 1 TD.

He went up against Armani Reeves at CB who played in only 3 games in 2013 with 10 tackles. Tyvis Powell was at safety who also appeared in only 3 games. Then almost got caught from behind on his TD play by 6-4 250 LB Joshua Perry who...you guessed it appeared in 3 games in 2013.

Who did Robinson play? His 100 yard games this year and rank in passing yards allowed per game defensively: Central Florida(73) , Indiana(122), Ohio St(118), Eastern Michigan(99), Illinois(64), Wisconsin(33), Nebraska(29), Syracuse(81).

Teams he didn't have 100 yard games on: Purdue(43), Kent State(30), Minnesota(39), Michigan(61). What's the theme here?

Jacksonville picked Lee before they picked Robinson(22 spots earlier in fact) for a reason. They like him more, period.

Robinson thrived against a variety of opponents. Xue posted this earlier and it caught my attention. It's a table designed to show how many of a WR prospect's big plays came against good corners.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BmZ3KppCEAAaUnt.png

The results show Robinson near the top of the group against top 100 corners and slightly above average against top 50 corners. I don't know what criteria they're using to determine who's a top 50 and a top 100 corner, but all the same it punches some holes in the idea that he only produced against minnows. As far as his schedule goes, you can only play the teams on your schedule. It's not any fault of his that he never came up against LSU, Alabama, FSU, or Oregon. Whether you're in the SEC or the Sun Belt, all you can do is thrive against whoever you get a chance to play.

Robinson certainly did that. He was very consistent last year. Penn State only played 12 games total and he still had 8 games of 100+ yards. His worst game of the season was 3 catches for 43 yards. He had one other game with 7 catches for 63 yards. He went for 80+ yards in every other game.

Isolating his performance against Ohio State doesn't make a lot of sense to me. For one thing, it's just one game and every WR has a bad game from time to time. Mike Evans had 4 catches for 51 yards against LSU and 4 catches for 8 yards against Missouri. Beyond that, I don't know if a blowout loss is really the best game to use when gauging a player's impact. Penn State lost that OSU game 63-14. They were down 42-7 at halftime and 56-7 by the end of the third quarter. To me this indicates a gross inequity in the talent level and performance of the two teams. Football is ultimately a TEAM game and when your team is losing every matchup on the field, it's probably that much harder for you to shine as an individual (which he eventually did anyway).

There are some compelling arguments against Robinson. He had a low TD rate and he ran a slow 40 time at the combine. On the balance though, college production is not an area where he has a lot of question marks. He was extremely productive and he did all of it as a 19 and 20 year old.

As far as Lee vs. Robinson goes, I agree that size and hands might be the only two main areas where A-Rob has an advantage over Lee. Those happen to be two of the most important traits for a WR though. Especially if you're talking about guys who go on to become elite FF contributors. 9 of the top 10 WRs last year were 6+ feet tall. Most of them by several inches. The average height of that group was probably a shade over 6'3".

That's my biggest problem with Lee, Beckham, and Cooks as FF commodities. Just based on their size alone, you can probably eliminate perennial top 10 WR upside from their range of career outcomes. Even if they pan out, you're likely looking at a ceiling somewhere along the lines of Wright/Cobb/Hilton. It makes an interesting debate when you weigh them against the 2nd round guys like Latimer, Robinson, and Adams who have more prototypical frames.

First off, thank you EBF for adding to the topic with actual content. The bickering was getting to be too much.

That's an interesting comparison with stats. I haven't seen that before and I would like to see the data points. Like you said, who was a top 50 or 100 CB. It looks like that comparison favors the heavily targeted WRs, Eric Ward is really high because he had lots of volume; however, OBJ was lower rated.

I agree that Robinson was consistent last year, but just noted who he struggled against. Thinking of the big 10(or 14 now) the top CBs last year were Dennard and Roby, he didn't play vs any big time CBs out of conference. Robinson didn't play vs Dennard in 2013 or 2012 that would've been nice to see. Which is why I looked at the Ohio State game vs Roby. He caught a couple of comebacks and jailbreak screens vs Roby and that's about it. Leaving me to doubt him, which is why I watched another 3 games on him before I came to any conclusions. Those 2 plays vs Ohio St are in many of his highlight films and I feel are the basis of his "after the catch ability." However, how many people take an in depth look? I'm unsure and that's why I put the stats after the game was out of hand. He "shined eventually" when he was playing vs 3rd stringers...that's not impressive for an argument of why someone should be better.

We've had the debate before about BMI and Height for WR's. I prefer height in my WRs, so Robinson has that already going for him. But I just see more deficiencies to his game. I also don't know how much better his hands are than Lee, probably some but I wouldn't call Robinson great in this area.

 

[EBF]

That's an interesting comparison with stats. I haven't seen that before and I would like to see the data points. Like you said, who was a top 50 or 100 CB. It looks like that comparison favors the heavily targeted WRs, Eric Ward is really high because he had lots of volume; however, OBJ was lower rated.

If I'm interpreting the stats correctly, volume has nothing to do with it. The stats are sorted by percentage. I think the percentage is supposed to indicate how many of the WR's receptions came against good corners. So Eric Ward at #2 only means that 13% of his receptions came against top 50 corners and 27% of his receptions came against top 100 corners. Maybe I'm interpreting that incorrectly, but Shaq Evans being ranked so high wouldn't make any sense if it were about sheer volume since he had far fewer catches and yards than most of the players on that list.

Stats are really useful, but it can also really easy to frame them in such a way that they tell you whatever you want to believe. I don't think scrutinizing one specific game is usually a good way to evaluate a prospect. Ideally, you'd cast a wide net and get a feel for how the player performed in a variety of conditions and circumstances before trying to reach a meaningful conclusion about his performance. I know from past experience that I've seen some great players have some shockingly bad individual games.

I was at the Stanford vs. Oklahoma Sun Bowl in 2009. DeMarco Murray rushed for 27 yards on 20 carries (1.4 YPC). Absolutely pitiful performance. I thought he looked horrible, but in hindsight he was obviously a pretty talented runner. A lot of his struggles in that game had nothing to do with his own ability and everything to do with the supporting cast, scheme, and opponent. Adrian Peterson had a pretty rough outing in the NCAA title game against USC back in 2004. 82 yards on 25 carries (3.3 YPC). USC totally outclassed OU in that game and everyone on the Sooners side suffered as a result.

One last example. Last season Darqueze Dennard "shut down" Ty Montgomery in the Rose Bowl. In reality, Stanford barely threw the ball. They had just 18 pass attempts the entire game and Montgomery only had a small number of targets before leaving the game in the second half with an injury. If you just looked at the box score you would say, "Man, Dennard shut down Montgomery." That doesn't begin to tell the entire story. Everything about the game dictated that Montgomery have a quiet night. Regardless of whether he is or isn't capable of beating Dennard consistently, that wasn't the game to find out the answer.

I could even extend that to entire seasons. Look at Steven Jackson's last season at Oregon State. Very mediocre by NFL RB prospect standards. 4.4 YPC. Struggled mightily against the good teams on his schedule (sub 4.0 YPC against USC, UW, Fresno, Arizona, and Oregon including a 2.8 YPC performance on 22 carries against the Trojans). I remember being pretty worried about that at the time. Was this guy a fraud? A player who dominated against creampuffs, but disappeared against good competition? In hindsight, those games said nothing about his ability and everything about the circumstance. When you're a marked man on a team full of scrubs playing against superior competition, you might not dominate like you should. Really doesn't mean anything.

I think you have to try to look at the complete picture with every player. Whether you like Robinson or not, 2-3 quarters of work from one game in which his entire team got slaughtered probably has a lot less to say about his prospects than his entire body of NCAA performance taken as a whole or his entire body of NCAA performance combined with other variables (i.e. draft slot, workout numbers, third party opinions, your opinion, etc). Stating otherwise seems like a really big stretch. It might be the difference between looking at the stats objectively and accepting whatever conclusions emerge from that process or looking at the stats with your mind already made up and only pulling out whichever data points agree with what you already believe.

 

[identikit]

Xue has shown a consistent bias against Lee over the past several months. It's hard to take any of his comments on him seriously IMO. The condescending tone has also grown tiresome, calling anyone who disagrees with him a "fan boy." Unfortunately he's not the only poster to do this. Personally, I could care less about internet name calling or whatever. It just causes me to lose a bit of faith in that person as a credible source. I'm not sure why you guys bother to engage him on the topic to be honest.

Incredibly condescending.

 

[Peeps Inc.]

I don't see how you have Lee over Robinson. And Robinson is "raw"? Not any more than Lee. I was watching video of the Jags Rookie Mini-camp. It's Lee who's getting extra instruction on this routes.

You could tell that Lee was getting more instruction than Robinson at rookie camp, specific to route running even, based on internet videos?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sgKvVTgxWgE

Keep laughing.

do you have access to more rookie minicamps this is magnificent, i searched for um but couldnt find much, nothing this good

 

[Xue]

Xue has shown a consistent bias against Lee over the past several months. It's hard to take any of his comments on him seriously IMO. The condescending tone has also grown tiresome, calling anyone who disagrees with him a "fan boy." Unfortunately he's not the only poster to do this. Personally, I could care less about internet name calling or whatever. It just causes me to lose a bit of faith in that person as a credible source. I'm not sure why you guys bother to engage him on the topic to be honest.

Incredibly condescending.

It's not condescending when I call out someone who calls me out on something they have no clue about.

 

[EBF]

Not that I disagree, but criticizing people for the way they post is condescending in its own right since it comes packed with the assumption that their habits and manners should align with what you yourself think is proper. Acting like a know-it-all and acting like the Internet police both assume the superiority of your own viewpoint. One is just a slightly more subtle brand of self-importance.

 

[nirad3]

And I thought I took this stuff seriously. Wow.

Todd Marinovich's dad called... he wants his crazy weird intensity back.

I drafted Lee in one rookie draft, because I think he's a talented WR that needs some work.

I drafted Robinson in another, because I think he's a talented WR that could really succeed in the case of Lee failing to impress.

 

[SayWhat?]

Xue has shown a consistent bias against Lee over the past several months. It's hard to take any of his comments on him seriously IMO. The condescending tone has also grown tiresome, calling anyone who disagrees with him a "fan boy." Unfortunately he's not the only poster to do this. Personally, I could care less about internet name calling or whatever. It just causes me to lose a bit of faith in that person as a credible source. I'm not sure why you guys bother to engage him on the topic to be honest.

Incredibly condescending.

It's not condescending when I call out someone who calls me out on something they have no clue about.

And what was that, or what were you called out on? Your definitive interpretation of a 5 minute YouTube clip as evidence that overall Lee was receiving more route running guidance and was thus more raw from that standpoint than Robinson? I've always enjoyed your postings and takes on players, but your stance on this one based on a YouTube clip is straight out of crazy town.

Again, I don't own either and would prefer Robinson if I had to choose based on upside.

 

[identikit]

Xue has shown a consistent bias against Lee over the past several months. It's hard to take any of his comments on him seriously IMO. The condescending tone has also grown tiresome, calling anyone who disagrees with him a "fan boy." Unfortunately he's not the only poster to do this. Personally, I could care less about internet name calling or whatever. It just causes me to lose a bit of faith in that person as a credible source. I'm not sure why you guys bother to engage him on the topic to be honest.

Incredibly condescending.

It's not condescending when I call out someone who calls me out on something they have no clue about.

Condescending.

It's possible, even easy, to disagree with someone without doing this.

 

[Bronco Billy]

Xue has shown a consistent bias against Lee over the past several months. It's hard to take any of his comments on him seriously IMO. The condescending tone has also grown tiresome, calling anyone who disagrees with him a "fan boy." Unfortunately he's not the only poster to do this. Personally, I could care less about internet name calling or whatever. It just causes me to lose a bit of faith in that person as a credible source. I'm not sure why you guys bother to engage him on the topic to be honest.

Incredibly condescending.

It's not condescending when I call out someone who calls me out on something they have no clue about.

And with that I'm done. What a jerk.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

Xue aren't you the guy who's normally different just to be different? Can you link us to some of your best calls in FBG history, because I don't remember them, well other than the Brian Quick call.

TIA!!!!1111

 

[Xue]

Xue aren't you the guy who's normally different just to be different? Can you link us to some of your best calls in FBG history, because I don't remember them, well other than the Brian Quick call.

TIA!!!!1111

I'm the one who gets attacked when offering up realistic expectations and analyses of a high-profile prospect or two who seem to have developed an obsessive fanbase.

Brian Quick was drafted in the 2nd round. It's obvious 1 NFL team saw what I saw. So what's your point?

I'm the one who once had Marqise Lee as the #2 WR in this class and one of few who has come to terms with what he really is.

I'm the one who had Melvin Gordon as the #1 RB back in August of 2013. And that's based on 82 carries.

I'm the one who predicted Odell Beckham, Bishop Sankey, and Ryan Grant to kill the 3-cone drill and shuttle.

I'm the one who had Odell Beckham as the #3 WR back on October 2013. Guess what he was the #3 WR drafted.

I'm the one who predicted Dri Archer to run a sub 4.30 40-yard dash. (Ok this one was probably too easy). I'm the one who predicts Tyreek Hill to run a sub 4.30 40 next year and possibly break Dri Archer's 4.26. Tyreek who?

I'm the one who actually measures the 40-yard dash times instead of blindly believing hand times on a stopwatch that you have never and will never see.

I'm the one who said Stephen Houston is Andre Williams with hands. Houston put up near identical measurables to Williams.

I'm the one who said James White is no less talented than Ka'Deem Carey.

I'm the one who will tell you who is this year's Melvin Gordon. I'm the one who has already identified next year's Melvin Gordon as well. You can feel free to PM me if you want to know.

I haven't been evaluating prospects for a long time, but I've gotten exponentially better within the last year or two. I don't think I'm better than anyone else, but I think I'm pretty damn good. And If I don't think I'm pretty damn good, then I might as well quit Fantasy Football.

 

[MAC_32]

I dont think being right about where a guy gets drafted is anything to chest thump about. I'd much rather be right about a prospect the nfl was wrong about than like an under the radar player that gets unexpectedly drafted high then amounts to absolutely nothing.

 

[EBF]

I'm the one who will tell you who is this year's Melvin Gordon. I'm the one who has already identified next year's Melvin Gordon as well. You can feel free to PM me if you want to know.

I haven't been evaluating prospects for a long time, but I've gotten exponentially better within the last year or two. I don't think I'm better than anyone else, but I think I'm pretty damn good. And If I don't think I'm pretty damn good, then I might as well quit Fantasy Football.

I think that post captures a lot of what rubs people the wrong way about your style. You say you don't think you're better than anyone else, but that's not how your posts come across. They come across as if you think you have all the answers and everyone else is a clueless fool. Like you have some "secret knowledge" and you're enlightening us all with your bottomless wisdom. The Tyreek Hill thing is a great example. Hill is rated as a 5 star RB prospect on Scout. Almost anyone who follows college recruiting closely will know who Tyreek Hill is and know that he's insanely fast. But you come in here to flaunt the knowledge like it's some special secret you discovered that we're all lucky to hear. Many of your posts have a similar vibe. Basically coming from the perspective that you know things everyone else doesn't know and that you might be kind enough to do us all a favor and share your amazing discoveries with us. See above, where the lucky audience can find out who this year's and next year's Melvin Gordon are if they're willing to get down on their knees and beg you for the answers.

Your whole posting style just reeks of someone with an inflated sense of his own abilities and a desperate desire to be perceived as a "guru." I think that's part of what drives your constant contrarianism, because if someone is already widely agreed to be an elite prospect (i.e. Ebron) then there's nothing to be gained by singing his praises. If everyone knows Ebron is good, saying he's good isn't going to win you any discovery points. So you've gotta make some hero call with Isaiah Crowell or Troy Niklas because if they pan out then you'll be lauded for banging the drum. You listed some of your hits above, but left out some of your numerous misses. You're the guy who said Melvin Gordon was a breakout player a year ago. Great. Good for you. You're also the guy who said Antonio Andrews was a top 5 RB, Chris Boyd was a good WR prospect, and countless other huge misses. If you make 100 bold calls in a year, some of them will be right and some of them will be wrong. Pulling out some of the hits or misses in isolation doesn't really say much about the entire body of work, one way or the other.

With all that said, you (obviously) have the right to post however you want. I'm certain some of the people reading this post would say that some of the criticisms I have about your style also apply to me. I don't particularly care if people don't like my posting style. Maybe you don't care either. Some people on here take having an opinion as a personal affront and honestly cannot engage in discussion about players without developing personal grudges. The truth is that the whole challenge of this hobby is to make better decisions than your peers. If you're signing up for that then you must have a big enough ego to believe that you can do it better than most of your competition. When people take others to task for their arrogance while simultaneously thinking they're a pillar of virtue in their own right, chances are they're just a huge hypocrite. In addressing these issues about you, I'm not trying to say I'm any better.

However, if you really want an explanation for why many people have an adverse reaction to your style, I think a lot of it stems from the reasons I named above.

 

[MAC_32]

All of us who follow college ftootball have a bit of an ego. If we didn't we wouldn't post about players the primarily nfl only crowd constantly fig us about. We all could handle it better, myself included, but dealing with those types that say well I will stick with the pros take and not some dude on a message board comes with the territory.

 

[cstu]

You guys are too young to remember but I told people Emmitt was going to be a HOF'er when he was at Florida.

 

[cstu]

All of us who follow college ftootball have a bit of an ego. If we didn't we wouldn't post about players the primarily nfl only crowd constantly fig us about. We all could handle it better, myself included, but dealing with those types that say well I will stick with the pros take and not some dude on a message board comes with the territory.

You guys that watch CFB are better at predicting who is going to do well at the combine, but I don't think it all that helpful when it comes to predicting NFL success. In fact, I think it may actually hurt your player evaluations because you develop emotional attachments to players.

 

[MAC_32]

All of us who follow college ftootball have a bit of an ego. If we didn't we wouldn't post about players the primarily nfl only crowd constantly fig us about. We all could handle it better, myself included, but dealing with those types that say well I will stick with the pros take and not some dude on a message board comes with the territory.

You guys that watch CFB are better at predicting who is going to do well at the combine, but I don't think it all that helpful when it comes to predicting NFL success. In fact, I think it may actually hurt your player evaluations because you develop emotional attachments to players.

it has caused me to have more success with my late round picks, waiver wire pick ups, and buy lows. However, I have missed some opportunities with upper echelon players. Recently I have tried to narrow my top prospects tier down to a select few I feel comfortable with then go get them. Trent Richardson withstanding it has gone well.Most of the bargain players I trend towards are actually the exact opposite of what you describe. They are players that did not blow up the combine and slipped some in part because of it. The offseason stars tht did less in college are the guys I end up staying away from.

 

[EBF]

All of us who follow college ftootball have a bit of an ego. If we didn't we wouldn't post about players the primarily nfl only crowd constantly fig us about. We all could handle it better, myself included, but dealing with those types that say well I will stick with the pros take and not some dude on a message board comes with the territory.

You guys that watch CFB are better at predicting who is going to do well at the combine, but I don't think it all that helpful when it comes to predicting NFL success. In fact, I think it may actually hurt your player evaluations because you develop emotional attachments to players.

I think it's mainly for dev leagues. If I didn't play in those, I don't think I'd pay much attention to underclassmen at all until they were in their final season. For a straightforward dynasty league with no dev players, the NFL draft does a lot of the sorting for you.

 

[MAC_32]

All of us who follow college ftootball have a bit of an ego. If we didn't we wouldn't post about players the primarily nfl only crowd constantly fig us about. We all could handle it better, myself included, but dealing with those types that say well I will stick with the pros take and not some dude on a message board comes with the territory.

You guys that watch CFB are better at predicting who is going to do well at the combine, but I don't think it all that helpful when it comes to predicting NFL success. In fact, I think it may actually hurt your player evaluations because you develop emotional attachments to players.

I think it's mainly for dev leagues. If I didn't play in those, I don't think I'd pay much attention to underclassmen at all until they were in their final season. For a straightforward dynasty league with no dev players, the NFL draft does a lot of the sorting for you.

i usually don't seek prospects out until they reach the year they are eligible to declare. I just watch a lot of college football and some jump off the page at me. Or I read about them later and go, yeah he played really well in those few games I watched. Only real exceptions are if I get towards the end of my devo draft and there really aren't any players with > 2 years experience I like. First time that happened was last year and it net me Alex Collins, so maybe I should do it more often.

 

[Brewtown]

I'm the one who will tell you who is this year's Melvin Gordon. I'm the one who has already identified next year's Melvin Gordon as well. You can feel free to PM me if you want to know.

I haven't been evaluating prospects for a long time, but I've gotten exponentially better within the last year or two. I don't think I'm better than anyone else, but I think I'm pretty damn good. And If I don't think I'm pretty damn good, then I might as well quit Fantasy Football.

I think that post captures a lot of what rubs people the wrong way about your style. You say you don't think you're better than anyone else, but that's not how your posts come across. They come across as if you think you have all the answers and everyone else is a clueless fool. Like you have some "secret knowledge" and you're enlightening us all with your bottomless wisdom. The Tyreek Hill thing is a great example. Hill is rated as a 5 star RB prospect on Scout. Almost anyone who follows college recruiting closely will know who Tyreek Hill is and know that he's insanely fast. But you come in here to flaunt the knowledge like it's some special secret you discovered that we're all lucky to hear. Many of your posts have a similar vibe. Basically coming from the perspective that you know things everyone else doesn't know and that you might be kind enough to do us all a favor and share your amazing discoveries with us. See above, where the lucky audience can find out who this year's and next year's Melvin Gordon are if they're willing to get down on their knees and beg you for the answers.

Your whole posting style just reeks of someone with an inflated sense of his own abilities and a desperate desire to be perceived as a "guru." I think that's part of what drives your constant contrarianism, because if someone is already widely agreed to be an elite prospect (i.e. Ebron) then there's nothing to be gained by singing his praises. If everyone knows Ebron is good, saying he's good isn't going to win you any discovery points. So you've gotta make some hero call with Isaiah Crowell or Troy Niklas because if they pan out then you'll be lauded for banging the drum. You listed some of your hits above, but left out some of your numerous misses. You're the guy who said Melvin Gordon was a breakout player a year ago. Great. Good for you. You're also the guy who said Antonio Andrews was a top 5 RB, Chris Boyd was a good WR prospect, and countless other huge misses. If you make 100 bold calls in a year, some of them will be right and some of them will be wrong. Pulling out some of the hits or misses in isolation doesn't really say much about the entire body of work, one way or the other.

With all that said, you (obviously) have the right to post however you want. I'm certain some of the people reading this post would say that some of the criticisms I have about your style also apply to me. I don't particularly care if people don't like my posting style. Maybe you don't care either. Some people on here take having an opinion as a personal affront and honestly cannot engage in discussion about players without developing personal grudges. The truth is that the whole challenge of this hobby is to make better decisions than your peers. If you're signing up for that then you must have a big enough ego to believe that you can do it better than most of your competition. When people take others to task for their arrogance while simultaneously thinking they're a pillar of virtue in their own right, chances are they're just a huge hypocrite. In addressing these issues about you, I'm not trying to say I'm any better.

However, if you really want an explanation for why many people have an adverse reaction to your style, I think a lot of it stems from the reasons I named above.

I think this posting says "a lot" - sheesh!Who thinks that their **** don't stink?

 

[Xue]

I'm the one who will tell you who is this year's Melvin Gordon. I'm the one who has already identified next year's Melvin Gordon as well. You can feel free to PM me if you want to know.

I haven't been evaluating prospects for a long time, but I've gotten exponentially better within the last year or two. I don't think I'm better than anyone else, but I think I'm pretty damn good. And If I don't think I'm pretty damn good, then I might as well quit Fantasy Football.

I think that post captures a lot of what rubs people the wrong way about your style. You say you don't think you're better than anyone else, but that's not how your posts come across. They come across as if you think you have all the answers and everyone else is a clueless fool. Like you have some "secret knowledge" and you're enlightening us all with your bottomless wisdom. The Tyreek Hill thing is a great example. Hill is rated as a 5 star RB prospect on Scout. Almost anyone who follows college recruiting closely will know who Tyreek Hill is and know that he's insanely fast. But you come in here to flaunt the knowledge like it's some special secret you discovered that we're all lucky to hear. Many of your posts have a similar vibe. Basically coming from the perspective that you know things everyone else doesn't know and that you might be kind enough to do us all a favor and share your amazing discoveries with us. See above, where the lucky audience can find out who this year's and next year's Melvin Gordon are if they're willing to get down on their knees and beg you for the answers.

Your whole posting style just reeks of someone with an inflated sense of his own abilities and a desperate desire to be perceived as a "guru." I think that's part of what drives your constant contrarianism, because if someone is already widely agreed to be an elite prospect (i.e. Ebron) then there's nothing to be gained by singing his praises. If everyone knows Ebron is good, saying he's good isn't going to win you any discovery points. So you've gotta make some hero call with Isaiah Crowell or Troy Niklas because if they pan out then you'll be lauded for banging the drum. You listed some of your hits above, but left out some of your numerous misses. You're the guy who said Melvin Gordon was a breakout player a year ago. Great. Good for you. You're also the guy who said Antonio Andrews was a top 5 RB, Chris Boyd was a good WR prospect, and countless other huge misses. If you make 100 bold calls in a year, some of them will be right and some of them will be wrong. Pulling out some of the hits or misses in isolation doesn't really say much about the entire body of work, one way or the other.

With all that said, you (obviously) have the right to post however you want. I'm certain some of the people reading this post would say that some of the criticisms I have about your style also apply to me. I don't particularly care if people don't like my posting style. Maybe you don't care either. Some people on here take having an opinion as a personal affront and honestly cannot engage in discussion about players without developing personal grudges. The truth is that the whole challenge of this hobby is to make better decisions than your peers. If you're signing up for that then you must have a big enough ego to believe that you can do it better than most of your competition. When people take others to task for their arrogance while simultaneously thinking they're a pillar of virtue in their own right, chances are they're just a huge hypocrite. In addressing these issues about you, I'm not trying to say I'm any better.

However, if you really want an explanation for why many people have an adverse reaction to your style, I think a lot of it stems from the reasons I named above.

How do you know Andrews and Boyd are misses? You must be more clairvoyant than I am. Everything I've seen from them shows me they're talented. But because they were Undrafted, they will never get the opportunity to show it. So it's a moot point.

 

[Brewtown]

I'm the one who will tell you who is this year's Melvin Gordon. I'm the one who has already identified next year's Melvin Gordon as well. You can feel free to PM me if you want to know.

I haven't been evaluating prospects for a long time, but I've gotten exponentially better within the last year or two. I don't think I'm better than anyone else, but I think I'm pretty damn good. And If I don't think I'm pretty damn good, then I might as well quit Fantasy Football.

I think that post captures a lot of what rubs people the wrong way about your style. You say you don't think you're better than anyone else, but that's not how your posts come across. They come across as if you think you have all the answers and everyone else is a clueless fool. Like you have some "secret knowledge" and you're enlightening us all with your bottomless wisdom. The Tyreek Hill thing is a great example. Hill is rated as a 5 star RB prospect on Scout. Almost anyone who follows college recruiting closely will know who Tyreek Hill is and know that he's insanely fast. But you come in here to flaunt the knowledge like it's some special secret you discovered that we're all lucky to hear. Many of your posts have a similar vibe. Basically coming from the perspective that you know things everyone else doesn't know and that you might be kind enough to do us all a favor and share your amazing discoveries with us. See above, where the lucky audience can find out who this year's and next year's Melvin Gordon are if they're willing to get down on their knees and beg you for the answers.

Your whole posting style just reeks of someone with an inflated sense of his own abilities and a desperate desire to be perceived as a "guru." I think that's part of what drives your constant contrarianism, because if someone is already widely agreed to be an elite prospect (i.e. Ebron) then there's nothing to be gained by singing his praises. If everyone knows Ebron is good, saying he's good isn't going to win you any discovery points. So you've gotta make some hero call with Isaiah Crowell or Troy Niklas because if they pan out then you'll be lauded for banging the drum. You listed some of your hits above, but left out some of your numerous misses. You're the guy who said Melvin Gordon was a breakout player a year ago. Great. Good for you. You're also the guy who said Antonio Andrews was a top 5 RB, Chris Boyd was a good WR prospect, and countless other huge misses. If you make 100 bold calls in a year, some of them will be right and some of them will be wrong. Pulling out some of the hits or misses in isolation doesn't really say much about the entire body of work, one way or the other.

With all that said, you (obviously) have the right to post however you want. I'm certain some of the people reading this post would say that some of the criticisms I have about your style also apply to me. I don't particularly care if people don't like my posting style. Maybe you don't care either. Some people on here take having an opinion as a personal affront and honestly cannot engage in discussion about players without developing personal grudges. The truth is that the whole challenge of this hobby is to make better decisions than your peers. If you're signing up for that then you must have a big enough ego to believe that you can do it better than most of your competition. When people take others to task for their arrogance while simultaneously thinking they're a pillar of virtue in their own right, chances are they're just a huge hypocrite. In addressing these issues about you, I'm not trying to say I'm any better.

However, if you really want an explanation for why many people have an adverse reaction to your style, I think a lot of it stems from the reasons I named above.

How do you know Andrews and Boyd are misses? You must be more clairvoyant than I am. Everything I've seen from them shows me they're talented. But because they were Undrafted, they will never get the opportunity to show it. So it's a moot point.

Andrews ran slower than many linemen at the combine. 4.82 just don't cut it in the NFL...

Andrews has an opportunity with Tennessee...

If he has the goods he can make the roster...

 

[Xue]

You've got Landry ranked as a top 24 guy, yet in the Landry thread you say:

I agree with EBF 100%. Landry simply is a minus athlete and that doesn't bode well for FF relevancy.

Sounds contradictory.

What gives? Wouldn't you rather put someone with more upside like Martavis Bryant there? Or maybe a John Brown?

 

[EBF]

How do you know Andrews and Boyd are misses? You must be more clairvoyant than I am. Everything I've seen from them shows me they're talented. But because they were Undrafted, they will never get the opportunity to show it. So it's a moot point.

That's one way to look at it. The other way to look at it is that you whiffed on the evaluation, they're really not very good, and the league will treat them accordingly. NFL teams have nothing to gain by overlooking viable talents. Quite the opposite.

 

[MAC_32]

Xue aren't you the guy who's normally different just to be different? Can you link us to some of your best calls in FBG history, because I don't remember them, well other than the Brian Quick call.

TIA!!!!1111

I'm the one who gets attacked when offering up realistic expectations and analyses of a high-profile prospect or two who seem to have developed an obsessive fanbase.

Brian Quick was drafted in the 2nd round. It's obvious 1 NFL team saw what I saw. So what's your point?

I'm the one who once had Marqise Lee as the #2 WR in this class and one of few who has come to terms with what he really is.

I'm the one who had Melvin Gordon as the #1 RB back in August of 2013. And that's based on 82 carries.

I'm the one who predicted Odell Beckham, Bishop Sankey, and Ryan Grant to kill the 3-cone drill and shuttle.

I'm the one who had Odell Beckham as the #3 WR back on October 2013. Guess what he was the #3 WR drafted.

I'm the one who predicted Dri Archer to run a sub 4.30 40-yard dash. (Ok this one was probably too easy). I'm the one who predicts Tyreek Hill to run a sub 4.30 40 next year and possibly break Dri Archer's 4.26. Tyreek who?

I'm the one who actually measures the 40-yard dash times instead of blindly believing hand times on a stopwatch that you have never and will never see.

I'm the one who said Stephen Houston is Andre Williams with hands. Houston put up near identical measurables to Williams.

I'm the one who said James White is no less talented than Ka'Deem Carey.

I'm the one who will tell you who is this year's Melvin Gordon. I'm the one who has already identified next year's Melvin Gordon as well. You can feel free to PM me if you want to know.

I haven't been evaluating prospects for a long time, but I've gotten exponentially better within the last year or two. I don't think I'm better than anyone else, but I think I'm pretty damn good. And If I don't think I'm pretty damn good, then I might as well quit Fantasy Football.

you will never be great until you accept that you will have some misses.Strive for greatness.

 

[LBH]

I agree with some of the others that have Robinson over Lee. I like Freeman over Mason. Not crazy about Amaro. Think I would have Bryant in there over some others. Overall good list and analysis

 

[Xue]

How do you know Andrews and Boyd are misses? You must be more clairvoyant than I am. Everything I've seen from them shows me they're talented. But because they were Undrafted, they will never get the opportunity to show it. So it's a moot point.

That's one way to look at it. The other way to look at it is that you whiffed on the evaluation, they're really not very good, and the league will treat them accordingly. NFL teams have nothing to gain by overlooking viable talents. Quite the opposite.

We can continue this discussion in my Rookie rankings thread.

 

[az_prof]

Guys, why not let Xue be? So, he annoys you and disagrees with you about Lee. Who cares? If it annoys you that much, put him on ignore. No need to make this thread about him.

 

[tdmills]

You've got Landry ranked as a top 24 guy, yet in the Landry thread you say:

I agree with EBF 100%. Landry simply is a minus athlete and that doesn't bode well for FF relevancy.

Sounds contradictory.

What gives? Wouldn't you rather put someone with more upside like Martavis Bryant there? Or maybe a John Brown?

Landry is #23 on here because I know he will get a good opportunity in Miami. I'm not a believer in Mike Wallace or Brian Hartline. Miami invested a 2nd round pick in him, so if it's the end of your 2nd round rookie draft people can take a flier on him. But i'm not a believer in his game.