King of the Jungle
Footballguy
One word F&L
AWESOME.
Definitely up for post of the year IMO.
AWESOME.
Definitely up for post of the year IMO.
Interesting. High ranking[45] LenDale White TEN 22.7 - I know there's a chance TEN will add another RB, but as of early March I wouldn't trade him for anybody below
I agree, but he's probably in the right tier, he should just be at the bottom of it. I don't think I'd trade Turner for him (even if I didn't have LT)RBM said:Interesting. High ranking[45] LenDale White TEN 22.7 - I know there's a chance TEN will add another RB, but as of early March I wouldn't trade him for anybody below
Whoa, take care of yourself, F&L. We need you here. How about we take up a collection and send F&L a couple cases of V-8? (Or maybe something stronger to mix it with? V-8 Bloody Marys?)Hope you're feeling better!I made some tweaks to the main rankings at the top of page one, but I'm still lacking kicker and defense rankings. It's been a rough week or two, so updates may be more intermittent than usual. As punishment for putting my 33-year-old body through the shenanigans of 8AM to 2AM St. Paddy's Day debauchery, dissipation, drunkenness and vice, pneumonia set in last week. On top of that, I've had to start cramming for baseball auctions this week. Woe is me.I need a V-8.
I see both these players as extremely similar for dynasty purposes right now with their situations and performance last year. Your rankings make me think you have a combo of over-rating Mo-Jo and under-rating Barber going on. If I shouldn't expect Barber to repeat his '06 TD production, why shouldn't I expect the same to happen to Mo-Jo?Another minor quibble, I would put McNabb at the top of tier 2. The only thing holding him back is health, his PPG average was #1 among QB's last year, he's a monster when on the field. Even if I was projecting him to go down somewhere between week 10-13 every year, it'd be worth it to draft him a couple of rounds in an initial draft after Peyton or Palmer for all those points in the first 2/3rds of the season he gives you. That's a huge benefit to getting you in the playoffs.[61] Maurice Jones-Drew JAX 22.4 - The most illogical trend I've seen on these boards lately is the concern over MoJo's future production now that Fred Taylor has been re-signed & Greg Jones may be healthy. This is the same Fred Taylor who shared the backfield with MoJo last season while he scored 16 TDs & finished in the top 8 in RB scoring. And is Greg Jones anybody's idea of a good runner? What we have here is fear of the unknown...not enough guys got to see MoJo play last year. They can't believe what they didn't see.
[38] Marion Barber III DAL 24.3 - Could be in line for increased role; just don't expect '06 TD production again in '07
Other than the fact that they both scored 16 TDs last season and they both share carries in the backfield for now, I don't think their performances or situations are all that analogous. Here is where I separate the two of them:1. TALENT: I've watched them both play. Mo-Jo is the better, more explosive runner. And I don't think it's close. On talent alone, Maurice Jones-Drew is a significantly better dynasty investment than Marion Barber III. Very important distinction.I see both these players as extremely similar for dynasty purposes right now with their situations and performance last year. Your rankings make me think you have a combo of over-rating Mo-Jo and under-rating Barber going on. If I shouldn't expect Barber to repeat his '06 TD production, why shouldn't I expect the same to happen to Mo-Jo?[61] Maurice Jones-Drew JAX 22.4 - The most illogical trend I've seen on these boards lately is the concern over MoJo's future production now that Fred Taylor has been re-signed & Greg Jones may be healthy. This is the same Fred Taylor who shared the backfield with MoJo last season while he scored 16 TDs & finished in the top 8 in RB scoring. And is Greg Jones anybody's idea of a good runner? What we have here is fear of the unknown...not enough guys got to see MoJo play last year. They can't believe what they didn't see.
[38] Marion Barber III DAL 24.3 - Could be in line for increased role; just don't expect '06 TD production again in '07
I don't think we disagree here. I've seen people knock McNabb for his injury proclivities, but I think most of that criticism misses the point. It's on you to find a reliable back-up for your dynasty team if McNabb is your starter. If he puts up elite production while he's healthy, you have a leg up on all but 2 or 3 teams in the league. If McNabb goes down and you can plug in a Kitna last year, or Delhomme the year before, or Favre the year before that (among others), then you aren't really losing a competitive edge. Better to have an injury prone guy for half the season (and a reliable back-up) than to have a guy who puts up production that is closer to the pack for a whole season. That said, here's my concern with McNabb: a lot of his value over his career has been tied up in his running ability and athleticism. How will that be affected by his ACL injury? At least for 2007, I don't expect him to be running nearly as much. He's not really a pure passer so much as he's an elite all-around QB, so I wonder how much of a weekly difference maker he will be with reduced mobility in the pocket and minus the major threat of breaking off a long run.Another minor quibble, I would put McNabb at the top of tier 2. The only thing holding him back is health, his PPG average was #1 among QB's last year, he's a monster when on the field. Even if I was projecting him to go down somewhere between week 10-13 every year, it'd be worth it to draft him a couple of rounds in an initial draft after Peyton or Palmer for all those points in the first 2/3rds of the season he gives you. That's a huge benefit to getting you in the playoffs.
Driver, Thank you...If you could see me now, I'd make the Mona Lisa look self-doubting.Just a quick note of gratitude to F&L -- hope you're feeling better from the pneumonia. After reading and reflecting on the long debate over "talent vs. situation," a couple thoughts came to me. First, I thought there were numerous good points made about valuation of players for dynasty purposes by many persons (in addition to the 2 primary debaters).Second, I have an even deeper appreciation for all of the time and effort that F&L has put into this thread (which I think is incredible and awesome, definitely would be on the short list for best ever IMO). Not to mention his willingness to share his rankings, his thought process, his insights, and his gut feelings (not to mention the tiers, numerical scores, clearly describing his assumptions, etc., etc.). And last but not least by any means, for taking the time to respond to many, many comments/criticisms in a thoughtful manner. I think the output of this thread is extremely valuable and a real service to many of us here. Thanks once again to F&L for a job well-done.
No question this is a solid thread. Keep up the the great work.Please give us some feedback as what aspects you'd like to see on our dynasty rankings. Bloom and I are already planning on a "why we made a change" column / article during this upcoming season. What else do you want to see?A question for the OP - what's a playoff dynasty league that I saw your referring to a few posts back?F&L, a big thanks for all the work you have put in here This is one of the threads I keep coming back to again an again. I've gotta say content-wise, I like what you do here better than the updated dynasty rankings that Jeff & Sig have in the premium content.Quick question, I have an initial dynasty startup draft coming up in May. Any chance you will be incorporating the incoming rooks into your rankings once we know what teams they are going to?Again, thanks for all your work here.
Thanks, Jeff.When I referred to playoff dynasty leagues, I was talking about a league that has a 17 week regular season with "x" amount of teams going to the playoffs during the NFL playoffs. In my 12-team leagues, the top 6 teams go to the playoffs. The top 3 regular season teams do get a set amount of dollars based on where they finished, but the bigger money is in the playoffs. The top 6 teams must come up with a playoff roster, which is where the strategy & competition really kicks up a couple of notches. Most guys make a couple (or a series) of trades with the non-playoff teams to acquire impact playoff players...giving up draft picks and promising young players in the process. I try to have my playoff base built during the season, so I don't have to worry about giving up guys like Larry Fitzgerald or Steven Jackson if the non-playoff teams are into price gouging.The playoff point totals are cumulative, and the winner isn't usually determined until after the Super Bowl is over. Your starting lineup is the same format as a regular season game except you lose a position if that player's team goes home. i.e. if you started Larry Johnson in round one, you lost a RB spot when the Chiefs lost to the Colts. If you had LT2 and didn't want to worry about losing that RB spot, you don't start anybody at LT2's spot in round one. As long as your player keeps winning, you can plug a different player into that position the next week if you so desire. I think this part is a lot like the non-dynasty playoff leagues that a lot of guys participate in.Homefield advantage is awarded based on regular season wins. #1 seed starts out with 18, #2 with 15, #3 with 12 and so on. But this can be tweaked depending on how much weight you want to give to the regular season.Like I've said before, it really forces you to use more strategy. It keeps you very involved during the NFL playoffs. There's much less luck involved than those crummy week 14-16 playoff leagues. It creatively adds a much needed parity to dynasty leagues by forcing the better owners to give up quality to get quality playoff players in return. On the other hand, tearing your team apart for a championship run is far from mandatory. I try to keep a strong nucleus of good young players, and use my depth and draft picks to add a key playoff piece here and there.When you earn a championship banner, you know you've had to fight tooth and nail to get it. Anymore, I figure Week 14-16 playoffs are for re-draft leagues with old friends. There's too much luck, not enough strategy involved and it fails to take advantage of the most important games of the NFL season. I don't know if I could go back to a non-playoff dynasty league at this point. You invest so much more in a dynasty playoff league.No question this is a solid thread. Keep up the the great work.Please give us some feedback as what aspects you'd like to see on our dynasty rankings. Bloom and I are already planning on a "why we made a change" column / article during this upcoming season. What else do you want to see?A question for the OP - what's a playoff dynasty league that I saw your referring to a few posts back?F&L, a big thanks for all the work you have put in here This is one of the threads I keep coming back to again an again. I've gotta say content-wise, I like what you do here better than the updated dynasty rankings that Jeff & Sig have in the premium content.Quick question, I have an initial dynasty startup draft coming up in May. Any chance you will be incorporating the incoming rooks into your rankings once we know what teams they are going to?Again, thanks for all your work here.
the sig: Thanks for the kind words.I will try to incorporate the high end rookies into these rankings after the draft, but by no means do I consider myself an expert on college football...especially relative to some of the guys around here who are at the guru level. As I'm not going to go into much depth there, you're probably better off checking with Bloom, et al. on rookies.See post #223 on page 5 of this thread for a more in-depth answer. Thanks again and please throw your around here more often whether you agree or disagree...F&L, a big thanks for all the work you have put in here This is one of the threads I keep coming back to again an again. I've gotta say content-wise, I like what you do here better than the updated dynasty rankings that Jeff & Sig have in the premium content.Quick question, I have an initial dynasty startup draft coming up in May. Any chance you will be incorporating the incoming rooks into your rankings once we know what teams they are going to?Again, thanks for all your work here.
Fair enough and your points are well taken. I know at the end of the day no matter how much "proof" and information I have compiled there are still circumstances that will lead me to choose one player over another. Ushualy this is because of perception, ADP and putting together a TEAM that causes me to choose a player that may be ranked lower than another based on proof or vice versa. Or one player being available at a better price making that player more valuable just because of the price tag despite what my "proof" may be telling me.Also "proof" is mostly based upon the past and one thing that is definitly proven is that things change.At the same time I use facts to keep me from drifting too far off the path and getting lost in the wilderness. Having a reality check is a important thing for me so as not to allow my imagination to run wild. I need boundries even when everything is in motion.I still do not understand what your numbers mean however. What do they represent? How do you use them? Or how are they intended to be used?Fair question. Let's see here...I used to toy around with those kinds of point scales based on handing out 1-10 points per category and tallying them all up to see who goes where. There are several problems with these systems. First of all, not all categories are created equal. Secondly, it's an unscientific grade that you're assigning each category, so it's nonsensical to aim for a scientific outcome. Finally, I'm never satisfied with the outcomes. For example, somebody like Culpepper will end up finishing way too high. And then you have to start fudging with the numbers to get him lower. Then if you're fudging his, you end up messing with a few others as well. To sum up, I've found those types of scales to be literally more trouble than the spreadsheet they're printed on are worth.Frankly, these rankings are not very scientific. There are two reasons for that. First, the goal is not a complex one: per requests in other dynasty threads, I'm simply trying to better represent value by showing where the gaps are and using a system that assigns value much better than a simple 1 thru 75 numbering sequence. Secondly, I think we're overloaded with numbers, studies, etc. anymore. Ten years ago, most of us in this thread dominated all of our leagues strictly as a result of having more information than the other guys in our leagues. The internet changed all of that now. Everybody has access to quality information on a regular basis. Fantasy football studies are ubiquitous...especially on this site (which is a great thing). So what happens when everybody is looking at the same studies? Opinions vary much less because we tend to fall in line behind "proof" and hesitantly push our instincts and gut-feelings to the side. How then do we gain an edge on the guys looking at the same information?My theory is this: if we all have ready access to the same information, how do you gain an edge on the upper echelon competition? Instincts honed by knowledge, which is honed by news updates, stats, trends and studies. That's what these rankings are in a nutshell. Instincts. There's no statistical or scientific basis to the numbers, but rather an attempt at showing differences in value as I perceive them.How did you create this point scale 1-100 for each player? And what does it mean?I have seen magazines that use somting similar for players. The point scale is ushualy based off of ranking the players by different skill sets such as inside running/outside running/blocking/catching/breaking tackles ect. Then they add all these 1-10 with decimal point scales together for a total score or make an average of that.Curious about what is behind your point scale.Great thread Fear and Loathing.
Hi Jeff,In terms of feedback, off the top of my head, three things I like better about the F&L rankings are:1. Tiering. I like putting my own rankings in tiers, just helps me during the draft. I may not agree with all of F&L's rankings/tier points, but appreciate the thought and effort.2. Love the brief commentary attached to each player. For the most part I know we could ask you or Sig or others for why they rank players where they do, or why they have moved up or down....but on the whole, it is nice to have the brief comment already there.3. Love the player age information attached to each player. Again, I know this is data we can all get elsewhere, but I appreciate seeing it right with the player.No question this is a solid thread. Keep up the the great work.Please give us some feedback as what aspects you'd like to see on our dynasty rankings. Bloom and I are already planning on a "why we made a change" column / article during this upcoming season. What else do you want to see?A question for the OP - what's a playoff dynasty league that I saw your referring to a few posts back?F&L, a big thanks for all the work you have put in here This is one of the threads I keep coming back to again an again. I've gotta say content-wise, I like what you do here better than the updated dynasty rankings that Jeff & Sig have in the premium content.Quick question, I have an initial dynasty startup draft coming up in May. Any chance you will be incorporating the incoming rooks into your rankings once we know what teams they are going to?Again, thanks for all your work here.
F&L:Thanks for the response. If you end up putting any rooks into your rankings, great, if not, I understand. I am faced with an upcoming dynasty draft where this years rook's and vets are in one draft, hence my interest in getting any opinions you may have on where some of the top rooks may fall.FWIW, I acknowledge my lack of great talent evaluator skills when it comes to rookies, so I tried to play to that fact in the aforementioned upcoming draft. I traded out of my 1.03 pick (among other picks) to amass a group of 7 picks between overall pick 17 and 45 (this is a 14 team league). I feel like I will be able to put together a great 'win now' team.Any thoughts on my trading down from 1.03? (I'm sure many will figure I'm crazy)the sig: Thanks for the kind words.I will try to incorporate the high end rookies into these rankings after the draft, but by no means do I consider myself an expert on college football...especially relative to some of the guys around here who are at the guru level. As I'm not going to go into much depth there, you're probably better off checking with Bloom, et al. on rookies.See post #223 on page 5 of this thread for a more in-depth answer. Thanks again and please throw your around here more often whether you agree or disagree...F&L, a big thanks for all the work you have put in here This is one of the threads I keep coming back to again an again. I've gotta say content-wise, I like what you do here better than the updated dynasty rankings that Jeff & Sig have in the premium content.Quick question, I have an initial dynasty startup draft coming up in May. Any chance you will be incorporating the incoming rooks into your rankings once we know what teams they are going to?Again, thanks for all your work here.
Post #160, in January.Any Team Defense Ratings F & L...?? Great Work on this post...
Thanks Couch Potato - I missed that earlier!Couch Potato said:Post #160, in January.Fighting Noles said:Any Team Defense Ratings F & L...?? Great Work on this post...
Look at Coach Potato handling my light work. Nicely done and much appreciated.I was going to wait until May to finish defenses because I wanted to see how the draft played out and make sure the free agents were pretty much done.Couch Potato said:Post #160, in January.Fighting Noles said:Any Team Defense Ratings F & L...?? Great Work on this post...
Thanks to all the guys for their positive replies.cscmtp: Remember the Seinfeld episode where Frank Costanza interprets a line from the father of his old Korean girlfriend? "This guy......this is not my kind of guy." Well, that's how I feel about Santana Moss.great job! My only suggestion is to move Santana Moss up. The QB position is the ONLY thing that can hold this guy back. I still think he's Steve Smith part deux. When Brunell had that magical last run in 2005, Moss exploded. Then it was clear Brunell had nothing left in the tank in 2006, and Moss' numbers struggled. Then they put in an extremely green Campbell who in reality was a rookie. But I am hopeful that Campbell will make big strides this year. He has the arm and mobility to actually get the ball down field (something Brunell could no longer do). Just like Smith stunk last year when Delhomme whent down (no fault of his own) I feel that same way about Santana's numbers last year. I expect he'll finish the year in the top 10 IF Campbell is as solid as I think he'll be.
They're obviously close in value. I think it comes down to personal preference and league set-up. Here's a good old fashioned tale of the tape:NFL Talent: BradyQuality of NFL Team: BradyOffensive Weapons: BulgerRedzone Production: BradyHealth: BradyYardage: BulgerDependability: Brady'07 Upside: BulgerCareer Upside: BradyLike I said, a lot depends on your league. I tend to give Brady credit because he's a winner, and the Pats are an annual contender. I realize that has no bearing on value in many leagues, but it carries a lot of weight in mine. I also like the fact that Brady consistently puts up 24-28 TDs, whereas 24 is the high water mark for Bulger.I think if you're in the mood to gamble on the one who could put up a career year in '07, Bulger has a better chance for an outlier type of season. On the other hand, he also has a better chance of getting injured and/or slumping. Long term, I prefer Brady. Short term, Bulger may well be the better payoff. It's up to you to decide which one better fits the needs of your team.[74] Marc Bulger STL 30.4 - Could be top 5 with addition of Bennett & McMichael; not much difference in value from #3 to #8 here. [73]Tom Brady NE 30.1 - Stallworth as a playmaker & Welker in the Troy Brown role; pushes Caldwell & Gaffney back down the depth chart where they belong.[71] #Donovan McNabb PHI 30.7 - 1st half fantasy MVP + dynamic scorer + emergence of Reggie Brown & signing of Kevin Curtis vs. health questions + Stallworth's exit + running numbers likely to fall off; if he shows he's healthy to start pre-season, I'll move him up to 3rd or 4thI favor Bulger more than Brady.. better weapons and a more friendly / pass happy offense. StL D also causes them to score more pts.
While watching "Planet Earth", I've been putting a few hours of prep work in for a "Draft Weekend Dynasty Risers & Fallers" list and then a revision of all of the positional rankings. I'm about half-way through the Risers & Fallers writeup and hope to have it finished sometime Monday.time for a new round of updates!
NO way.. Stallworth was the field strecther and Welker was going to be the possesion.. now that Moss is there.. who knows what Stall's place is there..Brady will look for 1) Moss 2) Watson 3) Stall or WelkerDon't be surprised if there are games that Stall doesn't even get a lookThis may actually help Stallworth as he is more of a WR2 anyway and now as teams roll coverage to Moss and defending Maroney he will still be an excellent deep threat and carry probably WR2 value.