Dynasty Rankings Update (1 Viewer)

[Matt Waldman]

I still have comments for all of my receivers, which I'll get to in the next 7-14 days but this is my snap shot take for late November...

 

[BallparkFrank]

Jordy Nelson ahead of Greg Jennings. Stones.

 

[jonboltz]

Thank you for these Matt. I could nitpick about certain rankings, but overall they were very solid and nice to have another perspective.

 

[PranksterJD]

Thanks Matt.

Sid Rice missing by mistake or design?

 

[Matt Waldman]

Check the individual WR rankings.

 

[Onions]

Check the individual WR rankings.

Matt-I think what Prankster is trying to say is that he did check Dynasty ranks for just WR and Sidney Rice is not listed in your Top 75 WRs. He has a * where the numerical rank would be.Guessing this is an oversight and am also curious where Rice ranks as a WR in dynasty formats.Thanks - Appreciate the work and response.

 

[Andrew74]

I guess I am surprised at where Julio is ranked (both Waldman and Bloom). Maybe I have owner bias, but he seems to be better than a fringe WR2 in dynasty. Guess I had a better outlook for him than A Brown and Denarius, whom I both own as well.

 

[Macdaddy_2004]

Where are the rankings?

 

[griff321]

Where are the rankings?

http://subscribers.footballguys.com/apps/viewrankings.php?viewpos=ov&type=dynasty&howrecent=7

 

[griff321]

These rankings are amazing. I may not agree with certain spots, but I doubt anyone has personal rankings that look anything like another persons. The individual write ups are a goldmine.

Great work

 

[moderated]

Props for those who updated their dynasty rankings.

 

[Judge Ito]

Nice work Matt, I am very appreciative that you take time to add comments to the vast majority of your rankings. Anyone can throw rankings on a page, but the fact that you provide comments allows us some insight into what you see/think about players to support your ranking.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Check the individual WR rankings.

Matt-I think what Prankster is trying to say is that he did check Dynasty ranks for just WR and Sidney Rice is not listed in your Top 75 WRs. He has a * where the numerical rank would be.Guessing this is an oversight and am also curious where Rice ranks as a WR in dynasty formats.Thanks - Appreciate the work and response.

I'll look into it at some point. I know he is lower than most have him, but I'll have to give it a second look to verify it's where I meant to have him.

 

[Rushmore]

Looks like Bloom added some as well. Much appreciated and from two of my favs !!!!

 

[pittstownkiller]

These rankings are amazing. I may not agree with certain spots, but I doubt anyone has personal rankings that look anything like another persons. The individual write ups are a goldmine.

Great work

Where are these; or are you referring to the player profiles you get by clicking on the players name?

 

[moderated]

These rankings are amazing. I may not agree with certain spots, but I doubt anyone has personal rankings that look anything like another persons. The individual write ups are a goldmine.

Great work

Where are these; or are you referring to the player profiles you get by clicking on the players name?

Click on the ranking number and a box pops up with detailed info on Walkmans rankings

 

[chook]

Many thanks guys, a very important part of the subscription IMHO.

 

[pittstownkiller]

These rankings are amazing. I may not agree with certain spots, but I doubt anyone has personal rankings that look anything like another persons. The individual write ups are a goldmine.

Great work

Where are these; or are you referring to the player profiles you get by clicking on the players name?

Click on the ranking number and a box pops up with detailed info on Walkmans rankings

Thank you, Moderated, and yes, those write-ups are a goldmine. Individual write-ups were something I asked for on the dynasty "complaint" page but dated and whole paragraphs are more than I expected; very nice .

 

[spider321]

Thanks guys!

 

[eakfootball]

Excellent. Thanks guys

 

[petenice15]

Jake Ballard isn't even listed? At 6'6" 275lbs and only in his second year, he's a walking mismatch. I'm not saying he's a top 10 guy, but the omission all together seems odd.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Ballard's listed for me, but much further down than the rankings application allows you to see. I actually think the Giants will draft a TE. Ballard has done well, but I'm not sold he's in their future. He might, but not enough to rank him in my top 40.

 

[Matt Waldman]

Ballard's listed for me, but much further down than the rankings application allows you to see. I actually think the Giants will draft a TE. Ballard has done well, but I'm not sold he's in their future. He might, but not enough to rank him in my top 40.

I deleted Rice by accident. I had him under Harvin but didn't get it to translate correctly when posting. Thanks for pointing it out.

 

[griff321]

We almost need to get positional discussion threads going, because it should be a great jumping off point.

I think that Mike Wallace ranking is crazy town. FBGs has been down on him since the end of last season and I just don't get it. He hasn't exactly won me a ton of games single handed like a Calvin Johnson does every week, but he always gives me double digit points even with other very talented guys vying for touches and unlike Jordy Nelson who's ranked ahead of Wallace. For a 25 year old in only his third season he's far outpaced a ton of guys ranked ahead of him and I think as long as he doesn't fall completely off the map the next few weeks he's earned a better ranking than mid-range WR2.

 

[Dragon1952]

Thank you very much guys!

 

[Anthony Borbely]

My rankings are up as well.

I know there are some that need to be adjusted, especially at WR. I wanted to get them done last night and did, but in doing so I went a bit too fast and thus there are a handful of players that I need to make adjustments on. Once I complete my IDP rankings I will go back over them.

Thanks for your patience as doing these are very time consuming.

I will try to update them every 2 weeks going forward.

 

[griff321]

My rankings are up as well. I know there are some that need to be adjusted, especially at WR. I wanted to get them done last night and did, but in doing so I went a bit too fast and thus there are a handful of players that I need to make adjustments on. Once I complete my IDP rankings I will go back over them. Thanks for your patience as doing these are very time consuming.I will try to update them every 2 weeks going forward.

Thanks a ton. Great work as always.If possible I would love to see little snipets like Matt did about the players. The logic behind a ranking has been far more valuable to me than the rankings themselves.

 

[Judge Ito]

My rankings are up as well.

I know there are some that need to be adjusted, especially at WR. I wanted to get them done last night and did, but in doing so I went a bit too fast and thus there are a handful of players that I need to make adjustments on. Once I complete my IDP rankings I will go back over them.

Thanks for your patience as doing these are very time consuming.

I will try to update them every 2 weeks going forward.

Thanks a ton. Great work as always.If possible I would love to see little snipets like Matt did about the players. The logic behind a ranking has been far more valuable to me than the rankings themselves.

While I realize that the rankings are time consuming, I completely agree with the bolded statement above; the comments/reasons behind a ranking is much more valuable.

 

[moderated]

My rankings are up as well.

I know there are some that need to be adjusted, especially at WR. I wanted to get them done last night and did, but in doing so I went a bit too fast and thus there are a handful of players that I need to make adjustments on. Once I complete my IDP rankings I will go back over them.

Thanks for your patience as doing these are very time consuming.

I will try to update them every 2 weeks going forward.

Thanks a ton. Great work as always.If possible I would love to see little snipets like Matt did about the players. The logic behind a ranking has been far more valuable to me than the rankings themselves.

While I realize that the rankings are time consuming, I completely agree with the bolded statement above; the comments/reasons behind a ranking is much more valuable.

It is very nice, but that would be way to time consuming for all of them to do.I think Waldman is going above and belong with the detailed analysis and expecting everyone to do that is a bit overkill IMO.

 

[scott46984]

This is great, one of the most valuable parts of a FBG subscription in my opinion. So helpful for those in keeper/dynasty leagues. Would be fantastic if in future years this was one of the regularly updated items, every couple of weeks or so, it's that valuable in my opinion. Thanks!

 

[griff321]

My rankings are up as well.

I know there are some that need to be adjusted, especially at WR. I wanted to get them done last night and did, but in doing so I went a bit too fast and thus there are a handful of players that I need to make adjustments on. Once I complete my IDP rankings I will go back over them.

Thanks for your patience as doing these are very time consuming.

I will try to update them every 2 weeks going forward.

Thanks a ton. Great work as always.If possible I would love to see little snipets like Matt did about the players. The logic behind a ranking has been far more valuable to me than the rankings themselves.

While I realize that the rankings are time consuming, I completely agree with the bolded statement above; the comments/reasons behind a ranking is much more valuable.

It is very nice, but that would be way to time consuming for all of them to do.I think Waldman is going above and belong with the detailed analysis and expecting everyone to do that is a bit overkill IMO.

I'm just giving some customer feedback is all. I don't see it as overkill either because a person can go through all sorts of scenarios in their head to justify a certain spot. Might as well jot a few sentences down so I can understand the why. I want to know how a clock is built not what time it is. Personally I'd rather have rankings updated with snipets every other month than rankings updated every two weeks. It could even be as simple as a sentence and I'd love it.

 

[valhallan]

This is awesome.

 

[Bradford4Prez]

Love the update.

If rankings are time consuming, I'd rather have commentary over rankings given the choice between the two. Rankings without context/logic are just numbers and names.

 

[munchkin]

My rankings are up as well.

I know there are some that need to be adjusted, especially at WR. I wanted to get them done last night and did, but in doing so I went a bit too fast and thus there are a handful of players that I need to make adjustments on. Once I complete my IDP rankings I will go back over them.

Thanks for your patience as doing these are very time consuming.

I will try to update them every 2 weeks going forward.

Thanks a ton. Great work as always.If possible I would love to see little snipets like Matt did about the players. The logic behind a ranking has been far more valuable to me than the rankings themselves.

While I realize that the rankings are time consuming, I completely agree with the bolded statement above; the comments/reasons behind a ranking is much more valuable.

It is very nice, but that would be way to time consuming for all of them to do.I think Waldman is going above and belong with the detailed analysis and expecting everyone to do that is a bit overkill IMO.

Matt doesn't actually have to type his comments. Like Spock's mind meld he simply touches the computer and his thoughts are transfered. There's no other way to explain his RSP. It's not humanly possible for anyone to manually enter all that stuff.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

Love the update.If rankings are time consuming, I'd rather have commentary over rankings given the choice between the two. Rankings without context/logic are just numbers and names.

Therein lies the dilemma. Rankings are time consuming and so are comments. The thing is comments have to be updated regularly because when situations change they become outdated. Comments cannot be inputted unless rankings are updated. Once we commit to comments, it has to be done regularly because I don't want to be stuck with no time to update comments because then the ones I did before could be outdated. I am trying to figure out a way to keep my rankings updated year-round, hopefully every week or 2 weeks, but there is no way I could do that and also manage comments during the season. I just don't have enough time. Regarding just the rankings, the only problem with respect to time that I have are doing in-season rankings. For me personally (and I mentioned this in the other thread) is that I am a full time college student and have to write 2 articles as well as working another part time job and my other life obligations. I barely have enough time to do all of that. I hate to make this sound like an excuse, but time during the season is a major issue for me. Anyways, I'm going to try and keep my rankings updated year-round going forward, every week or possibly every 2 weeks.

 

[pittstownkiller]

Love the update.If rankings are time consuming, I'd rather have commentary over rankings given the choice between the two. Rankings without context/logic are just numbers and names.

Therein lies the dilemma. Rankings are time consuming and so are comments. The thing is comments have to be updated regularly because when situations change they become outdated. Comments cannot be inputted unless rankings are updated. Once we commit to comments, it has to be done regularly because I don't want to be stuck with no time to update comments because then the ones I did before could be outdated. I am trying to figure out a way to keep my rankings updated year-round, hopefully every week or 2 weeks, but there is no way I could do that and also manage comments during the season. I just don't have enough time. Regarding just the rankings, the only problem with respect to time that I have are doing in-season rankings. For me personally (and I mentioned this in the other thread) is that I am a full time college student and have to write 2 articles as well as working another part time job and my other life obligations. I barely have enough time to do all of that. I hate to make this sound like an excuse, but time during the season is a major issue for me. Anyways, I'm going to try and keep my rankings updated year-round going forward, every week or possibly every 2 weeks.

I don't want to be a schmuck here and I do appreciate the sincerity in which you give your situation but about the last thing this thread needs is to hear that someone doesn't have the time. Can I assume now that Matt is the ******* making everyone else look bad? It sounds like your busy, and working hard on improving your life, but do you tell your other employer your to busy to get what he wants out of you because you have to do football rankings; if so, I recommend you stop. I don't know if everyone on this site would have to do rankings with explanations but if I was doing them I think having a blurb would be just as beneficial to me as to others; for example if I have a WR ranked so highly because I love his coach, his QB, or even the other WR on the other side, and those situations change I would immediately be in a position to put the changes into context and also would be providing others with knowing that so-and-so was only ranked 5th overall because he had X on the other side. I think Matt went above board, and I for one like it, but I would of even taken rankings that just had a few words, much like Bloom's second opinion; or even one word like "this ranking was based on: talent, situation, team-prowess, coaching, or system". I have never done a complete ranking, so I don't want to pretend I know what it entails, but I imagine I would be generating some notes; this is all that needs to be included. I would also think that when the inevitable happens and I project a player who doesn't pan out to do so well, it would be nice to see what the hell I was thinking; having S. Ridlay high on a board makes a lot more sense in the context of where he was viewed earlier in the year than it does now, for example. Good luck with your schooling; as for here and your other endeavors, do your best, you'll never be disappointed.

 

[TheCheat]

I will try to update them every 2 weeks going forward.

Personally I'd rather have rankings updated with snipets every other month than rankings updated every two weeks. It could even be as simple as a sentence and I'd love it.

I'd prefer something more like this too and, for my lone subscriber's $, I'd prefer to see something more like, well, take the four staffers who've updated most recently...If just those four -- as no good deed should go unpunished -- could update their dynasty rankings once a month in-season, and perhaps stagger them (e.g., two push updates every two weeks) and that'd make comments a la Waldman's each time possible, that'd be terrific.

And if it'd take, say, once/six weeks for some to make their updates with comments and you get x more staffers into the cycle (both updating rankings less frequently but adding comments each time), also terrific. As long as I saw slow but steady and consistently updated dynasty rankings and comments (at least a couple of sets w/in two weeks fresh), I'd consider that way more valuable than a staffer's (probably and understandably) rushed rankings-only snapshot every two weeks.

In the meantime, thanks to those who've responded and updated rankings so far.