Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Garda's Dynasty WR Rankings? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter IHEARTFF
- Start date
bengalbuck
Footballguy
The dynasty rankings here are just bad in general. I could ask 100 questions like this one that seemingly have no logical answer.
The Future Champs
Footballguy
Maybe Garda thinks Bowe is the #5 dynasty wr.hth.
Hence the request for explanation. Those are completely outrageous rankings.
The Future Champs
Footballguy
I wouldn't rank him this high, but outrageous is a bit of an overreaction. You could easily put him in the 12-17 range.
bigmarc27
Footballguy
12-17 and top 5 is a bit of a difference don't you think?
The Future Champs
Footballguy
It is a bit of a difference, but not outrageous. That said, I don't see how he can be ranked at #5 with the qb situation in KC. As for Thomas, #27 seems kinda low, but he has competition from Decker, and Manning isn't going to last much longer, so I don't think it's outrageous either.'bigmarc27 said:
ConnSKINS26
Footballguy
I think DT's Achilles could pop again and he still wouldn't hit 27 for me.
cstu
Footballguy
I know it's a lot of work to make write ups about every player you rank, but when those are there it's the best thing about the dynasty rankings.
Last edited by a moderator:
petenice15
Footballguy
I thought the same thing
bigmarc27
Footballguy
It's all guesswork anyway, but if you're going to charge people for guesses you should give them some reasonable explanations. Otherwise it's just making it up as you go. It doesn't matter to me, I'm not using the rankings myself, I just like reading opinions.'Christo said:
The Future Champs
Footballguy
Taking a quick look at his rankings:WRs not ranked below Bowe:CalvinAJJulioRoddyWRs you have to rank above Bowe:NicksMarshallWRs who really deserve an explanation for why they're ranked below Bowe, and I probably won't agree with said explanation anyways:Fitz (well, we all know why he's dropped in the rankings...)AndrePercyDezVjaxWRs who are a reasonable tossup with Bowe going forward:JordyDemaryiusWRs who I'd rank ahead of Bowe, but it's IMHO:CobbCrabtreeWRs I'd trade away for Bowe:Welker (if he doesn't resign with NE)Wallace Jennings CruzSteve JohnsonAnyone playing for PhillyColston
SSOG
Moderator
Honestly, FBGs is the best place on the webz for redraft stuff, but their dynasty content has always been a little bit wonky. Someone like Pasquino I understand- I strongly disagree with his dynasty strategy, but he has been very clear about what that philosophy is (essentially, he uses a ridiculously strict 2-3 year window, which results in rankings that look like very slightly modified redraft rankings). Moreover, he has been very consistent when applying that philosophy. I can guess where Pasquino will have a player ranked based on his philosophy, and I can usually get it pretty close. I can cover the names at the top of the rankings, and I always know which are his (just look at whoever has Andre, Welker, Chris Johnson, DeAngelo Williams, or any other aging stud the highest). While I still maintain that being that strict with your windows, in practice, leaves you constantly hemorrhaging value, I respect that he's consistently applying a cogent philosophy that he says he's had a lot of success with. Right or wrong, that kind of honesty and consistency is admirable. Some of the time, though, I just can't see what consistent philosophy is at work. For instance, one staffer has Brees at qb12. Okay, if your philosophy is youth-heavy, I suppose I could see why you might do something like that because Brees just turned 34. Except the same staffer has Eli Manning at qb7. Eli is just two years younger than Brees. Brees had more VBD in 2011 than Eli has in his entire career. Eli has 145 career VBD. Brees has averaged 103 VBD a year in the seven seasons since joining New Orleans. I just don't think there's any philosophy- youth-centric, talent-centric, short-window, long-window, no-window, win-now, rebuild- that would justify ranking Eli ahead of Brees by one spot, let alone 5. I'm deliberately not naming names because the point isn't to call anyone out. And, truth be told, there are a lot of rankings that didn't make sense at the time, but with the benefit of hindsight, were right on the money. Imagine someone ranking Priest Holmes as a top 5 asset when he went to Kansas City. Or ranking Kaepernick over Vick last offseason. Imagine ranking Drew Brees over Philip Rivers right after San Diego drafted Philip Rivers in the top 5 to replace Drew Brees. At the time, any one of us would have called these rankings out as absurd, but they were no less true for their absurdity. And who knows, maybe Eli goes for 45 TDs and Brees retires next offseason. Crazier things have happened, right? I'm not trying to use social pressure to enforce conformity among all rankings. Before someone asks, no, SSoG does not stand for "Some Sort of Groupthink". The point isn't to point out one outlier ranking, it's to point out that there are a lot of those outliers. I'd be a lot happier if some of the FBG staffers were a little bit more forthcoming with their reasoning- I'm not expecting them to be as clear and consistent about their philosophy as Pasquino, but I'd like to at least know where they're coming from. As it stands, it feels a lot like FBGs noticed they weren't serving their dynasty community very well, so they just tasked some of their non-dynasty guys with putting out some rankings now and then to superficially inflate their content. The only problem is, if I wind up checking the box to ignore maybe 75% of their dynasty rankings, it slims the content right back down in a hurry. I know I've said before, but it bears repeating- the worst thing about dynasty information on the Internet is the complete lack of accountability. That's why the dynasty thread is the best dynasty resource on the net, IMO- everyone there has a posting history, and they are accountable to that history. Accountability is a big part of the FBGs brand- Dodds and crew have been ranked by enough independent fantasy evaluators, and have consistently scored well enough, that any odd projections automatically deserve at least the benefit of the doubt. For the dynasty stuff, though? Who knows- as soon as one set of rankings is uploaded, the previous one disappears into the ether. Maybe Garda's low ranking of Demaryius would be a lot more credible if he had correctly predicted the declines of Roy Williams, Braylon Edwards, and Tampa Mike Williams. Maybe I'd be more inclined to give credence to his high Bowe ranking if he'd been banging the drum for Brandon Lloyd and Michael Crabtree in the past couple of years. When he makes bold, striking predictions, has he historically had a pretty good success rate? Or have those predictions proven as crazy as they seemed at the time? I don't have the faintest idea, because it's 2013 and there still isn't anyone on the Internet who preserves archives of past dynasty rankings. If there's no accountability, then there's really no deterrent or consequence for making poorly reasoned predictions, and it becomes impossible to determine who is taking a stand, who is grinding an axe, and who is just throwing stuff up to see what sticks.
Biabreakable
Footballguy
SSOG I just wanted to say that was a very well thought out post. Now I understand better where you and EBF are coming from when you say "strict 3 year window" projection based rankings.For me while some assessments may be baked into the projection, depending on how the projection is done there is still going to be information left out of it that you should try to be aware of. For example if you applied quality years remaining into the projection (not sure how one could do that only projecting 3 years)then it would already be accounted for, but I don't think it is. That is something you would do after the projection, moving a player up or down a few slots in the same projection tier, or for example when looking at 2 players for a trade consideration, or based on your rosters current goals. As far as these rankings being talked about here to be honest it sounds like those rankings have not been updated since beginning of last season. 
Another problem with dynasty rankings is that the roster size can make a HUGE difference. In my league (which really is more of a keeper league than a true dynasty league), we only carry twice as many roster slots as our starting lineup. This makes it very difficult to carry prospect players that need more than a year to develop without forgoing depth. Add an escalating salary after two years, and it becomes too expensive to keep players for more than 3-4 years unless you happened to pick him up as a super-cheap flyer immediately before they exploded. With a league like this, the long-term prospects of a player often become secondary to the "what can you do for me now" value. So for team owners like me, Pasquino's short-term window makes a whole lot more sense than for someone with 50-player rosters with no salary caps and no disincentives to stash players for multiple years.
SSOG
Moderator
That would explain a lot, but alas, it's not to be. Garda updated multiple times through the year, with the most recent being 4 days ago. I suppose some glitch could have resurrected last year's rankings, but while that would explain things like Philip Rivers as QB5, it would raise as many questions as it answered- like who on earth would have Flacco and Kaepernick at 7 and 12, Martellus Bennett at 9, or Adrian Peterson at rb2 before the season even kicked off. Half of his rankings made perfect sense before the season started, and the other half make perfect sense now, but either explanation raises as many concerns as it addresses. I guess the best explanation is that he has an extremely high level of inertia- it takes a lot of additional data to change his rankings a small amount- but even then, some of his rankings seem out of place. As I said, I just have a hard time divining a consistent and cogent philosophy from his current rankings.As far as these rankings being talked about here to be honest it sounds like those rankings have not been updated since beginning of last season.
What I notice is that there are some big names (fitz, breed, cam, etc.) showing up as unranked so I hope we are seeing some player ID errors or something. Otherwise, there are some terrible rankings scattered in there. My biggest concern is that before the season, we were all told there would be a huge push for improvement in dynasty rankings and content. Did I miss it?
matttyl
Footballguy
Exactly, it's hard to find two dynasty leagues that are the same in terms of starting lineup, roster size, rostered position limits, number of teams in league, on and on....For instance in my league I can easily justify Tannehill being worth more than Brady. How? It's a 10 team league where we only start 1 QB each week and I already have Rodgers. Brady isn't going to do anything for me on my bench every week while Rodgers is starting, but Tannehill is still likely to be in the league in 4 years where Brady very well may not be.Same idea with Larry Fitzgerald for instance. Same league we start 2 WRs and have 2 flex spots (so maybe you have the RBs for the flex and you only roll with 2 WRs each week). If you have Calvin and D Thomas as your #1 and #2, Fitz at his age isn't doing much for you, so maybe you'd rather have Crabtree or T Smith or even Josh Gordon instead.
SSOG
Moderator
Yes, that's just an error on his overall rankings where he missed some names. Go to the positional rankings and you'll see he has Fitz at wr7, Brees at qb2, and Newton at... qb18
There is zero logic to Cam's ranking at 18.he's 23 and was QB5 in 2012 and QB6 in 2013.Newton at... qb18
NoFBinLA
Moderator
Hey guysSo this is AG and I can't get into my staff account - I will happily answer concerns and questions over the course of the weekend (am working now and can't) but will assure you for now:These are not cut and paste or oldThese are not willy nilly 'shock em' rankingsI often rank some younger players a little lower initially in a year ( I mean these are the day after the Super Bowl ) because free agency, draft and many other issues come into play. I may be a little low on DT, but it's early in the season and I like some of the other players a bit better (I';ll get into why at some point soon). I like Cam, but I want to hear more about the offense they're going to put in - he was horrible half the year this year and I am not going to toss him high right now. That may change.There are definitely some errors in the overall rankings and I thought I had caugvht them but I guess not - so another project to double check this weekend when I am not under 40 feet of snow.Fitz and Brees for sure should be on the main ranking so I'll have to look at that.Again, happily take on the task of answering your questions as long as it stays civil and yall keep an open mind. Remember, these are my rankings - and you may value some guys for reason's I don't. Which is fine - we just may disagree. Also, these will get updated probably every few weeks or no less than once a month. So you'll see some jumps here and there depending on off season news and stuff we're hearing in general.I'll also be tackling comments for the players but that's a very long undertaking and as you guys are gathered in one place, I'll tackle them after I tackle these here. Like I said, am working now, but this came to my attention so I wanted to touch base. Happy also to answer questions on Twitter or via my staff address garda_at)_footballguys (dot com)
Spin
Footballguy
Look forward to hearing your rationale as it might help find some below the radar guys that people are undervaluing, your Bowe in particular has me intrigued.Thanks for responding, AG. Really glad this thread is becoming a potentially interesting discussion in backing up unconventional rankings.I think DT showed in his last 7 games with Tebow that he was going to be elite. Having Peyton throwing to him is just a bonus for these next couple seasons. I think you would be hard pressed to find almost anyone valuing him outside the top 10-12 WR. Many have him in the top 5-6.Bowe has exactly 0 seasons as good as the one DT just put up as a 25 year old. Bowe is 4 years older. For further comparison, Reggie Wayne had 1 such season with Manning. I see Bowe as a nice value around 25, and he could have a revival of sorts with Andy Reid and a new QB. But he never has been nor should he ever be ranked 5th overall.Thoughts?
In a start up dynasty draft if you had the choice between Cutler and Cam you would seriously take Cutler?
Matt Waldman
Footballguy
As for my rankings...two things: 1. I tend to rank my top QBs, TEs, and WRs higher than RBs than many because I believe in their long-term productivity. This makes my overall rankings look skewed compared to the crowd. 2. Most important - I'm not happy with my rankings overall. Not in the sense that I want to take them down and just not post them. I put thought into these. However, I really feel like there are some inherent problems with ranking players for dynasty leagues that aren't defined or addressed - at least not to my satisfaction as someone who ranks players. I'm working through some concepts during the off season and I hopefully will arrive at a more documented system that I use to rank my dynasty players, which will also give me a firmer guideline for how I approach changing my rankings. Otherwise it becomes an issue of which reader agrees most with which writer and lots of nitpicking that (to be expected to an extent)I'd prefer to answer more efficiently with a link to what I've spelled out. Then we can drill down to answering questions that are really substantive. One of these things I'm doing involves a database I have been keeping for many years. I've used it to supply a lot of data for columns I've written about fantasy football since 2004. I'm writing this while taking a quick break from updating my database so I can run some numbers to help me study trends that I believe will give me some worthwhile information to use as basis for this system I want to develop. I hope to be done by May and I'll unveil my rankings system and possibly - no promises - a spreadsheet available for download that may have some things you can use and customize to your philosophy. That may be a 2-3 year goal, but I hope to head in that direction. Thanks for your patience.
NoFBinLA
Moderator
Do you know how Cam will react to this coming season? How he'll react to the changes? We've seen Cutler adjust once already from Denver to Chicago and after a year he played well (although he got hurt) and this was behind an awful oline which never got fixed for a defensive minded coach.Again, when I've heard more about the offense, I'll adjust. How I'll adjust is totally dependent on actual news not just hunches. I like Cam. I want to see what they do with him and how they say they'll use him. I want to see what Trestman has in store for Cutler as well, but I'm reasonably sure it will be throwing the ball quite a bit, since that's what Trestman has done previously—including guiding two vet QBs to MVP seasons - guys who, honestly weren't THAT good.So yeah, right now a week or so after the Super Bowl, yeah I would seriously consider Cutler over Cam. These aren't fixed rankings we never adjust. They're constantly adjusting and evolving creatures. Like Wildman, I don't love my rankings. I have my own questions. But as they have every single year, they work themselves out over time.You act like there is a right and wrong answer, by the way. There isn't.'moderated said:
I question how the rankings are adjusted. I think some FBG staff cut/copy/paste (for lack of a better word) just to keep updated and I think some actually do leg work and put serious thought into it.AG, no way you take Cutler over Cam in a start up if those 2 were the QBs of choice. You should/would take Cam just for the value alone and trade him later.True, there is not a right or wrong answer but Eli at 4, Rivers at 5 over Cam?I'm sure if you had Cam in your league and was offered Eli, Rivers or Cutler for him you accept it instantly, right?I'd rather for the FBG staff to say we missed this in our rankings or something was a mistake than to try and justify some of these questionable rankings.
Last edited by a moderator:
fruity pebbles
Footballguy
I'm convinced there's no real rationale behind some rankings. Some people just don't know what they're doing. No point in asking unless you want an irrational answer.
No offense but your logic here is mind boggling.Cutler has been in the league for 8 years and is regressing, he hasn't even been in the top 20 FF qb's the past couple seasons. Do you know how cutler will react to a new coach? Is it all of a sudden going to make him good when he's sucked for most of his 8 year career.Cam has played 2 NFL seasons and has been the 5th and 6th best FF qb in those couple seasons.You say you will adjust when it's all spelled put for you, fine, but based on the information we have and what we've seen the past few seasons it's insane to have cutler over cam. There is no justification or logic to have cutler over cam, it makes no sense at all.There are no absolutes in dynasty FF, but we have enough of a sample where takin cutler over cam at this point in time in awful and trying to justify it is even worse. Just admit the mistake and adjust.
This is the easiest, and in this particular instance the smartest, solution. If you run into rankings that are so mind-bogglingly bad that you wonder if your niece picked names out of a hat, just move on.
SSOG
Moderator
Although I try to be judicious with my use of the exclusions, because it's easy to just exclude everyone who disagrees with me and then use the resulting rankings to reaffirm how right I was all along. The exclusion button is dangerous, and should be used judiciously (or you should at least reflect on the rankings you're excluding to make sure you're exposing yourself to different perspectives). If you don't want to go to the extreme of excluding an entire set of rankings, sorting by AAV is also very useful- it discards the highest and lowest ranking for a player and then averages the rest. If you hate Garda's Newton ranking, AAV will make it go away without nuking the rest of his rankings in the process.I appreciate non-conformist rankings as much as anyone, but rankings with no sound logic behing them should be questioned.Some of these rankings are like betting on a 100-1 underdog yet deluding yourself into thinking they are even odds. Without having to risk anything some staffers make bizarre calls and if they end up right look like a genius. If they end up wrong like they will 90%+ of the time on these crazy calls no one notices. It's a no risk hero mentality that ends up being bad for football guys reputation for dynasty information.Differing opinions are great, but ones made for the sake of being different to free roll a hero call serve no purpose.
Thanks Matt,Although I rarely agree with your rankings but I respect your willingness to have a view/philosophy/system. You have made this clear in the past, so it at least allows me to kind of understand some of your rankings. One thing I do find interesting is a "kind of" conflict in your logic that I am sure you have an explanation for. You frequently stick with a 2-3 yr window view on RB/WR/TE but tend to take a longer view on QB. I have an idea why you treat these differently, but would like to hear your view.
Last edited by a moderator:
HellToupee
Footballguy
I appreciate honest non-cookie cutter rankings. I don't have to agree with them but I like to see different takes. Much better than 20 staffers with all the same opinions.
biju
Footballguy
To start, I agree with your basic point that I would value Cam over Cutler.Having said that, there is a bit of truth to AG's basic premise as well: there is more to the success of a QB than just his ability. We need to take into account at the very least:1. The supporting passing cast: If the WRs can't get separation, don't run the correct routes, frequently drop the ball, etc. it can have an impact. Also, your Offensive line plays a huge role here (not that anyone is saying it isn't).2. The supporting rushing attack: If there is a top tier RB on the roster there will be a tendency to pound the ball, and the coaching philosophy and play-calling will generally fall toward that direction. You can't rack up passing yards if the team is running the ball. It's worth pointing out that a strong running game does lead to longer drives and keeps defenses honest too, which can also work in your favor.3. Late game strategy: I probably need to come up with better wording here, but the idea is simple: is the team ahead and running out the clock, or are they behind and need to pass to make up ground? 4. Your team's defense: Strong defenses tend to give the ball right back to the offense and in turn wear down and weaken opposing defenses.And, of course, I'm 100% positive there are other considerations I haven't written down.I'm not a fan of the idea that you need to automatically discount young players because their situation is more unquantifiable as that is quickly how to rank Jay Cutler ahead of Cam Newton. Veteran dynasty owners know that name value is as important as actual point value; a player like Cam Newton could have a reasonably down year in 2013 and still possess greater trade value than Cutler merely because of his known ceiling and youth. It's the qualitative side of FF that is often the ire of rankers and requires a definition of approach more than anything else.
Matt Waldman
Footballguy
This is something I'm working on during the off season. I hope one of my first Gut Check columns of the preseason will cover this in detail.
Dr. Octopus
Footballguy
There really aren't any "changes" though. Carolina promoted the QB Coach, Shula, to OC so they could keep the same system in place. They specifically said they did this in order to not disrupt Newton's development.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hate to say it, but the Cutler/Cam response and rationale behind the rankings justify an indefinite check in the exclusion box.
Real Man of Genius
Footballguy
Agreed. The rankings are either not thought out or poorly reasoned.
NoFBinLA
Moderator
So..... you want me to tell you what you want to hear not what I think?
