Madieu Williams - Can we drop him from the top 10 finally please (1 Viewer)

[oldmandrummer]

Ok, yeah yeah yeah, I know....projections are only a reference blah blah blah. I pay good cash to get the content of this site and have for a few years now. When we charge fees, we somewhat hold ourselves out there to be knowledgeable about the subject at hand, and to spend the relevant time researching stats etc....I don't pick my team based on the projections - thats for sure. When I am 'waffling' on a player/position, then I check it out. Rarely does it pay off. I am not sure how many weeks in a row Madieu Williams has been top on the DB list or close to the top. So here he sits on my roster, thinking....yep....maybe this is the week footballguys gets it right. Drop the guy already. Suck it up. Admit its a bust pick and put some thought into who goes on that list!

There...I feel much better and have wanted to vent for 3 weeks now - just change it! No excuses....no shirking responsibility.....just change it.

 

[jgb95]

I'm in a very deep league with an indepth scoring system and Madieu is the #3 over all S.

I know he doesn't seem it week in and week out but I just can't bench him!!!!

My scoring is below.

 

[bonscott]

Hmmm. Well, he's the #6 overall DB in my IDP league and just 6 pts from being #4 overall. So he's come up a bit small the past couple weeks. He's still a must start stud every week, no questions asked, unless you have a better option. Which means who cares what the projections are.

 

[oldmandrummer]

13th DB in my league based on points and netted me 3 points last week and 4 points the week before - he has 18 tackles over the last 4 weeks and not much else worth mentioning.....that's not good production and the projections should reflect that sooner than 4 weeks later....just my opinion

 

[patrickmcgroin]

3rd overall safety in mine, 9th when you add in CBs too. The last two weeks have been disappointing though.

 

[bonscott]

A key thing here is scoring system. I assumed the OP is factoring in his unique scoring system into the equation. If you haven't setup your team(s) in "My FBG" then run, don't walk, and do so. Then you'll get projections unique for your league scoring system. VERY important when it comes to IDPs.

For example: This week projections rank Williams #6 overall IDP for me. Not #1. And as we always say, don't look at the ranking so much because just one less tackle drops him from #6 to #25 or 2 more lowly assists rank him #1. In other words the Top 25 are that close.

So make sure you set it up to list it out based on your scoring system. Then you can get an accurate look at the projected total *points* and not the ranking itself.

 

[The_Hunchback]

13th DB in my league based on points and netted me 3 points last week and 4 points the week before - he has 18 tackles over the last 4 weeks and not much else worth mentioning.....that's not good production and the projections should reflect that sooner than 4 weeks later....just my opinion

I don't pay for the rankings but you might think about how many other players you would have to drop using your logic.Gibril Wilson - 17 solos past 4 weeks.Jermaine Phillips - 15 solos past 4 weeks.Marlin Jackson - 11 solos past 4 weeks.These are only a couple, we could make a nice big list here I'm pretty sure if you want.Madieu is the #9 ranked DB in my league, and ranks in the top 32 LBs with points. That makes him a LB2 in my league if you want to look at it a different way. In my IDP only league he is the #3 safety. Thinking many people are going to put him on the bench just isn't going to happen.Thinking can go a long way.

 

[redman]

Ok, yeah yeah yeah, I know....projections are only a reference blah blah blah. I pay good cash to get the content of this site and have for a few years now. When we charge fees, we somewhat hold ourselves out there to be knowledgeable about the subject at hand, and to spend the relevant time researching stats etc....I don't pick my team based on the projections - thats for sure. When I am 'waffling' on a player/position, then I check it out. Rarely does it pay off. I am not sure how many weeks in a row Madieu Williams has been top on the DB list or close to the top. So here he sits on my roster, thinking....yep....maybe this is the week footballguys gets it right. Drop the guy already. Suck it up. Admit its a bust pick and put some thought into who goes on that list!There...I feel much better and have wanted to vent for 3 weeks now - just change it! No excuses....no shirking responsibility.....just change it.

#5 in one of my dynasty leagues, #3 in the other. WTF are you talking about?

 

[cartel]

Ok, yeah yeah yeah, I know....projections are only a reference blah blah blah. I pay good cash to get the content of this site and have for a few years now. When we charge fees, we somewhat hold ourselves out there to be knowledgeable about the subject at hand, and to spend the relevant time researching stats etc....I don't pick my team based on the projections - thats for sure. When I am 'waffling' on a player/position, then I check it out. Rarely does it pay off. I am not sure how many weeks in a row Madieu Williams has been top on the DB list or close to the top. So here he sits on my roster, thinking....yep....maybe this is the week footballguys gets it right. Drop the guy already. Suck it up. Admit its a bust pick and put some thought into who goes on that list!There...I feel much better and have wanted to vent for 3 weeks now - just change it! No excuses....no shirking responsibility.....just change it.

Damn it Norton won't you fix your crystal ball...

 

[John Norton]

Once again you guys have made the point that FBG customers are the most knowledgeable Fantasy Football fans/owners on the planet. At least the vast majority of you.

The point has already been made but I'll add that if you are waiting for me to sour on Madieu Williams, it's going to take a lot more than a couple of average weeks to make that happen. He's the best player on a struggling defense and has turned in double digit fantasy points in 5 of 8 games this season. Not only is he top 10 in most scoring systems but this week he faces a Ravens team against which he totaled 7-3 with a forced fumble and a recovery in their first meeting.

I have no problem with criticism (preferably constructive) and welcome comments/questions from our customers. That said, if your going to go off on a tangent about something, it's probably a good idea to do a little homework first. I project over 400 players a week and while there are inevitably going to be some mistakes/over sites, you can rest assured that I do mine.

 

[oldmandrummer]

Once again you guys have made the point that FBG customers are the most knowledgeable Fantasy Football fans/owners on the planet. At least the vast majority of you. The point has already been made but I'll add that if you are waiting for me to sour on Madieu Williams, it's going to take a lot more than a couple of average weeks to make that happen. He's the best player on a struggling defense and has turned in double digit fantasy points in 5 of 8 games this season. Not only is he top 10 in most scoring systems but this week he faces a Ravens team against which he totaled 7-3 with a forced fumble and a recovery in their first meeting. I have no problem with criticism (preferably constructive) and welcome comments/questions from our customers. That said, if your going to go off on a tangent about something, it's probably a good idea to do a little homework first. I project over 400 players a week and while there are inevitably going to be some mistakes/over sites, you can rest assured that I do mine.

and the 'tangent' is?Bottom line is, projections don't do much good for following weeks. What I mean is if you project him #1 one week and he gets 3 fantasy points and then you project him #1 again and he gets 4 fantasy points.....don't you think its time to reevaluate the guy? Yes I'd drop and did drop Gibril and others that net low tackles over 4 weeks. FF in my league is a week to week thing. I start and roster 3 defenders and can't afford some schlock getting 3 and 4 points a week somewhat relying on the 'intellect' of people that are getting my cash.So now....what tangent?

 

[Bizkiteer]

Once again you guys have made the point that FBG customers are the most knowledgeable Fantasy Football fans/owners on the planet. At least the vast majority of you.

The point has already been made but I'll add that if you are waiting for me to sour on Madieu Williams, it's going to take a lot more than a couple of average weeks to make that happen. He's the best player on a struggling defense and has turned in double digit fantasy points in 5 of 8 games this season. Not only is he top 10 in most scoring systems but this week he faces a Ravens team against which he totaled 7-3 with a forced fumble and a recovery in their first meeting.

I have no problem with criticism (preferably constructive) and welcome comments/questions from our customers. That said, if your going to go off on a tangent about something, it's probably a good idea to do a little homework first. I project over 400 players a week and while there are inevitably going to be some mistakes/over sites, you can rest assured that I do mine.

and the 'tangent' is?Bottom line is, projections don't do much good for following weeks. What I mean is if you project him #1 one week and he gets 3 fantasy points and then you project him #1 again and he gets 4 fantasy points.....don't you think its time to reevaluate the guy?

Yes I'd drop and did drop Gibril and others that net low tackles over 4 weeks. FF in my league is a week to week thing. I start and roster 3 defenders and can't afford some schlock getting 3 and 4 points a week somewhat relying on the 'intellect' of people that are getting my cash.

So now....what tangent?

"Tangent?" How about looking at your rant and then others proving that what you said carries no weight what so ever. I'd call that a tangent of sorts. Not trying to be a FBG cheese ball, but you're post is really WEAK! Many people have pointed out already that he is a top ten S/DB in their league. They control the fact a player has a sub par week...Stuff (being polite) happens, get over it. As far as projections, if the player is in the top ten or around it and that is what they projected...you got more than you're money's worth. Seems you're one of those people that can't be pleased...Sheesh!

 

[Jene Bramel]

Bottom line is, projections don't do much good for following weeks. What I mean is if you project him #1 one week and he gets 3 fantasy points and then you project him #1 again and he gets 4 fantasy points.....don't you think its time to reevaluate the guy?

Yes I'd drop and did drop Gibril and others that net low tackles over 4 weeks. FF in my league is a week to week thing. I start and roster 3 defenders and can't afford some schlock getting 3 and 4 points a week somewhat relying on the 'intellect' of people that are getting my cash.

I think there a couple of very good points getting lost in the wash here.Firstly, while I understand that your initial post was mostly venting, I don't think it's an excuse at all to point out that there is extreme variability in one week projections. It happens with every position -- offense and IDP. I don't have the consistency scores to back it up, but, anecdotally, this season has been significantly more difficult to project weekly matchups on both sides of the ball. The number of backups and third stringers getting significant playing time at important positions has really upped the "unknown" factor.

At some point, you're dead on, we have to take into consideration recent trends. But, although it's a tough argument in the face of all the "stud" players that haven't rebounded this year, it's usually not correct to react and over-correct. In Williams' case, he's not injured, he's essentially surrounded by the same defensive personnel (or worse) and his matchups have dictated his continued optimistic projections (take a look at the pre-CIN data for Williams three "poor" games -- NYJ -- PIT -- BUF). Norton has already made his case for Williams this week and I'd agree. With Heap likely to return and the Ravens a run first defense facing a poor front seven, there should continue to be opportunity for Williams. Here's the trend for the BAL matchup.

Finally, if you're rostering three defenders a week, you're playing in a system that further emphasizes the week-to-week variability of football. Not just IDP fake football, but football. I'd bet that the highest scoring team in many of our leagues has had a couple of weeks where things went awry and had a "solid" lineup score outside of the top half of the league. What if you were starting only one RB or WR each week? When is it correct to leave Chad Johnson on the wire for Kevin Curtis? Recommend Earnest Graham over Marion Barber each of the past two weeks?

I can assure you that Norton, and the rest of us, consider as many variables as we have time for each week when responding to advice requests and generating our content. We've already had internal discussions about how we should approach next year given the craziness of this year with so many "stud talents" not rebounding despite no clear evidence to suggest that they wouldn't have. Will it be correct in the future to recommend dumping Keith Bulluck after one month? What about Julius Peppers, Terrell Suggs? When does two weeks of so-so production without a clear cause (injury, surrounding cast change, etc) become meaningful?

It's part of the fun (and frustration) of forecasting.

What can you do in the meantime? Try to reduce your volatility by targeting the most consistent players over recent weeks. Pick a player and stick with him regardless of matchup and recent up/down play unless there's a clear reason to move on. Consider adding more IDPs to your lineup to reduce the volatility in future seasons.

Rest assured when I tell you that we appreciate you reading us. We've all got some pretty hard bark around here -- we appreciate the defensive side of the ball after all -- but you're going to ruffle some feathers when you strongly suggest that we shirk responsibility or that valid explanations might be dismissed as excuses. If you've lurked around here long enough, you'll know that we're not afraid to start threads calling ourselves out (I certainly have) and take our lumps when deserved, usually in the name of getting better.

 

[cartel]

Has this thread run its course yet?

 

[J Giles Band]

I think there a couple of very good points getting lost in the wash here.

Firstly, while I understand that your initial post was mostly venting, I don't think it's an excuse at all to point out that there is extreme variability in one week projections. It happens with every position -- offense and IDP. I don't have the consistency scores to back it up, but, anecdotally, this season has been significantly more difficult to project weekly matchups on both sides of the ball. The number of backups and third stringers getting significant playing time at important positions has really upped the "unknown" factor.

At some point, you're dead on, we have to take into consideration recent trends. But, although it's a tough argument in the face of all the "stud" players that haven't rebounded this year, it's usually not correct to react and over-correct. In Williams' case, he's not injured, he's essentially surrounded by the same defensive personnel (or worse) and his matchups have dictated his continued optimistic projections (take a look at the pre-CIN data for Williams three "poor" games -- NYJ -- PIT -- BUF). Norton has already made his case for Williams this week and I'd agree. With Heap likely to return and the Ravens a run first defense facing a poor front seven, there should continue to be opportunity for Williams. Here's the trend for the BAL matchup.

Finally, if you're rostering three defenders a week, you're playing in a system that further emphasizes the week-to-week variability of football. Not just IDP fake football, but football. I'd bet that the highest scoring team in many of our leagues has had a couple of weeks where things went awry and had a "solid" lineup score outside of the top half of the league. What if you were starting only one RB or WR each week? When is it correct to leave Chad Johnson on the wire for Kevin Curtis? Recommend Earnest Graham over Marion Barber each of the past two weeks?

I can assure you that Norton, and the rest of us, consider as many variables as we have time for each week when responding to advice requests and generating our content. We've already had internal discussions about how we should approach next year given the craziness of this year with so many "stud talents" not rebounding despite no clear evidence to suggest that they wouldn't have. Will it be correct in the future to recommend dumping Keith Bulluck after one month? What about Julius Peppers, Terrell Suggs? When does two weeks of so-so production without a clear cause (injury, surrounding cast change, etc) become meaningful?

It's part of the fun (and frustration) of forecasting.

What can you do in the meantime? Try to reduce your volatility by targeting the most consistent players over recent weeks. Pick a player and stick with him regardless of matchup and recent up/down play unless there's a clear reason to move on. Consider adding more IDPs to your lineup to reduce the volatility in future seasons.

Rest assured when I tell you that we appreciate you reading us. We've all got some pretty hard bark around here -- we appreciate the defensive side of the ball after all -- but you're going to ruffle some feathers when you strongly suggest that we shirk responsibility or that valid explanations might be dismissed as excuses. If you've lurked around here long enough, you'll know that we're not afraid to start threads calling ourselves out (I certainly have) and take our lumps when deserved, usually in the name of getting better.



Well said... as usual.

While the guy's underlying premise might have held water (even if he was obviously wrong in the case of Williams who is a top 10 DB in virtually any scoring system)... the way he went about conveying it made it a baseless rant worth any scathing response he received.

 

[oldmandrummer]

I think there a couple of very good points getting lost in the wash here.

Firstly, while I understand that your initial post was mostly venting, I don't think it's an excuse at all to point out that there is extreme variability in one week projections. It happens with every position -- offense and IDP. I don't have the consistency scores to back it up, but, anecdotally, this season has been significantly more difficult to project weekly matchups on both sides of the ball. The number of backups and third stringers getting significant playing time at important positions has really upped the "unknown" factor.

At some point, you're dead on, we have to take into consideration recent trends. But, although it's a tough argument in the face of all the "stud" players that haven't rebounded this year, it's usually not correct to react and over-correct. In Williams' case, he's not injured, he's essentially surrounded by the same defensive personnel (or worse) and his matchups have dictated his continued optimistic projections (take a look at the pre-CIN data for Williams three "poor" games -- NYJ -- PIT -- BUF). Norton has already made his case for Williams this week and I'd agree. With Heap likely to return and the Ravens a run first defense facing a poor front seven, there should continue to be opportunity for Williams. Here's the trend for the BAL matchup.

Finally, if you're rostering three defenders a week, you're playing in a system that further emphasizes the week-to-week variability of football. Not just IDP fake football, but football. I'd bet that the highest scoring team in many of our leagues has had a couple of weeks where things went awry and had a "solid" lineup score outside of the top half of the league. What if you were starting only one RB or WR each week? When is it correct to leave Chad Johnson on the wire for Kevin Curtis? Recommend Earnest Graham over Marion Barber each of the past two weeks?

I can assure you that Norton, and the rest of us, consider as many variables as we have time for each week when responding to advice requests and generating our content. We've already had internal discussions about how we should approach next year given the craziness of this year with so many "stud talents" not rebounding despite no clear evidence to suggest that they wouldn't have. Will it be correct in the future to recommend dumping Keith Bulluck after one month? What about Julius Peppers, Terrell Suggs? When does two weeks of so-so production without a clear cause (injury, surrounding cast change, etc) become meaningful?

It's part of the fun (and frustration) of forecasting.

What can you do in the meantime? Try to reduce your volatility by targeting the most consistent players over recent weeks. Pick a player and stick with him regardless of matchup and recent up/down play unless there's a clear reason to move on. Consider adding more IDPs to your lineup to reduce the volatility in future seasons.

Rest assured when I tell you that we appreciate you reading us. We've all got some pretty hard bark around here -- we appreciate the defensive side of the ball after all -- but you're going to ruffle some feathers when you strongly suggest that we shirk responsibility or that valid explanations might be dismissed as excuses. If you've lurked around here long enough, you'll know that we're not afraid to start threads calling ourselves out (I certainly have) and take our lumps when deserved, usually in the name of getting better.



Well said... as usual.

While the guy's underlying premise might have held water (even if he was obviously wrong in the case of Williams who is a top 10 DB in virtually any scoring system)... the way he went about conveying it made it a baseless rant worth any scathing response he received.

ok...a top ten does not help anyone all that much when there are 12 teams in a league - everyone has a top ten. When I see a guy projected at number one week in and week out and his scores do not reflect # 1 at all, there is a problem. Statistics are not that complicated. I can go back to other guys and point out the same thing....Chad Johnson being one. Consistently at the top......not consistently good. I would think the idea is to try to project before the trend of weeks upon weeks makes it obvious to the lay public. So now that Chad has not done well for the last 4 weeks, we finally have it reflected. So, when I come back after this week and Bump this thread....I hope you 'haters' will be a little more receptive to what seems like common sense to me.

 

[John Norton]

Excellent post Jene. I can't help but think the whole problem here is that his league only rosters and starts 3 defensive players. My question then would be why bother.

Projections are based on probability. The likelihood is that Williams is going to bounce back and be just fine. The problem is that oldmandrummer is looking for either a flawless player who never has a bad week or a prognosticator with a crystal ball that tells him when those bad weeks will come. Unfortunately neither of these exists. I don't believe there is a single defensive back in the NFL who has recorded 5 or more tackles in every game this year and there is no way for me or anyone else to know what each offensive game plan is on a given week and/or how that will effect the numbers of a given player. The bottom line here is that there is no perfect answer for him because there is not supposed to be. As they say, that's why they play the games.

What I don't want to see here is a nasty thread with guys taking shots at one another. I will continue to do my level best on the projections and just like the rest of us, drummer will continue to be frustrated when players don't perform as expected. It's all part of the game.

Best of luck to everyone!

 

[Jene Bramel]

So, when I come back after this week and Bump this thread....I hope you 'haters' will be a little more receptive to what seems like common sense to me.

I'll be here, , though I'll warn you in advance that I'm not going to be impressed with a single player sample size. What do we do if Williams finishes with a 6-3 line this week? Thump our chest and say we were right all along about him over the past three weeks? What do we do if Williams craps out this week, seemingly proving your point, then goes on a tear that makes him the #2 overall DB for the season?For those wondering if this thread has run its course, I think this could turn into a very valuable thread discussing the importance of understanding volatility and how to combat and/or take advantage of it. I think it's a very underappreciated concept among newbies and vets alike.For now, I'll continue to express my disagreement that it's "common sense" to downgrade a player who's had two weeks of below expected production after six weeks of solid numbers when there isn't a clear argument for the change in number. Reconsider and re-evaluate, most definitely.Good luck this week. The projections won't be perfect again -- that's a stone cold lock. I hope the volatility runs in your favor.

 

[bonscott]

If you are only rostering 3 defensive players total then why even bother with a DB? Every team should have LBs and be done with it. Or 2 LBs and 1 DB or very top DL guy.

If I could only have 3 total IDPs I doubt I'd have Williams on my team other then as a 3rd guy after a couple stud LBs.

The problem is not the projections, it's how you are using them. With only 3 IDPs I wouldn't even be bothering with projections at all to be honest. The variabitity is too wide for you need.

 

[bonscott]

And how are you actually looking at the projections? If you only have 3 on a roster in a 12 team league that is 36 total.

And thus you need to look at *all* IDPs as one pool.

Guess what, when I do that (using FBGs projection pool) I see Williams at #43 overall IDP using my scoring system. Guess what, that means he *should not be on a roster* in my league if we also did just 3 IDPs per team.

And guess what again, there are only 3 DBs in TOTAL in the top 36. You can do this yourself easily by setting up your scoring system in the My FBG application and sorting by all IDPs together (NOTE TO Jene and John: All IDPs together is not an option for the Top 200 going forward lists).

Like I said, in your league and what sounds like your scoring system is you shouldn't have Williams (or nearly any DB) on your roster at all. If you want some help with analysis on this point (which should help others with similar leagues) why don't you give us some details:

1) What is your scoring system

2) Starting lineup requirements and roster requirements for IDPs

3) What IDPs do you have now on your team

4) What are the top 10-15 available IDP free agents in your league, especially LBs

 

[oldmandrummer]

And how are you actually looking at the projections? If you only have 3 on a roster in a 12 team league that is 36 total.And thus you need to look at *all* IDPs as one pool.Guess what, when I do that (using FBGs projection pool) I see Williams at #43 overall IDP using my scoring system. Guess what, that means he *should not be on a roster* in my league if we also did just 3 IDPs per team.And guess what again, there are only 3 DBs in TOTAL in the top 36. You can do this yourself easily by setting up your scoring system in the My FBG application and sorting by all IDPs together (NOTE TO Jene and John: All IDPs together is not an option for the Top 200 going forward lists).Like I said, in your league and what sounds like your scoring system is you shouldn't have Williams (or nearly any DB) on your roster at all. If you want some help with analysis on this point (which should help others with similar leagues) why don't you give us some details:1) What is your scoring system2) Starting lineup requirements and roster requirements for IDPs3) What IDPs do you have now on your team4) What are the top 10-15 available IDP free agents in your league, especially LBs

without all the details, we have used 3 idp's in the past and LB's were always weighed so heavily that we tried to even up the field and started awarding point for passes defended, as well as the standards...tackles, INTs, etc...I suppose its a culmination of frustration that this is not the only incident...I just happen to check out the projections this week and realized I still have Madieu on my roster I also think it has been a situation this year that a guy will post good numbers, I'll grab him and then he picks daisies. After a second week of that, I cannot afford to continue rostering no production to see if 'maybe he bounces back'. So, the short is, I am realizing that projections are amusing at best. Its nice to see where someone else 'ranks' my players...and the ocassional - "hey, they got my RB at #1 this week" (pat on the back to myself). But to drop someone and run out and grab another based on projections, has not proven prudent for me. So, to each their own.....butI will be back next week

 

[oldmandrummer]

And how are you actually looking at the projections? If you only have 3 on a roster in a 12 team league that is 36 total.

in theory yes, but some teams have 4 and 5 IDPs (which I never understood, but thats another story)

 

[bonscott]

And how are you actually looking at the projections? If you only have 3 on a roster in a 12 team league that is 36 total.

in theory yes, but some teams have 4 and 5 IDPs (which I never understood, but thats another story)

Ok, so how many can you start?And how many can you have on your roster? Total roster requirements would be helpful.Like in my IDP league we have the following...Rosters: 2 HC (head coach), 2 OL (offensive lines), 2 QB, 4 RB, 5 WR/TE, 2 PK, 6 DL, 6 LB, 6 DB (yes, 6 at each IDP position).Starters: 1 HC, 1 OL, 1 QB, 2 RB, 3 WR/TE, 1 PK, 3 DL, 4 LB, 4 DB (alternatively you can run a 4-3 defense with 4 DL and 3 LB)Scoring: 10 pts per TD, 1 pt per 5 rush/receive, 1 pt per 10 pass, -10 per turnover (ouch!)5 pts first tackle, 3 each for 2-6, 5pt each 7+ (which is why I typically say 3.5 avg per tackle)1 pt per assist2 pts per PD (passed defenced)5 pts forced fumble10 pts per sack, INT, fumble recovery20 pts per Defensive TD (fumble or INT return)If you don't score 400 pts in this league you lose.I thought it was crazy scoring when I joined but it is actually very balanced between offense and defense. A good defense can carry a team even if you don't have stud RBs and WRs.Anyway, so I have that all inputted into the My FBG app. If you do the same it will help you evaluate players better across the defensive positions. My scoring system steady tacklers are really good but the big play is HUGE. DL that get lots of sacks *and* get steady tackles are gold. LBs are kind of course. DBs that get steady tackle numbers are big and those with big play ability even better.See this is where we need all the above info on your league to help you target the best IDPs for your particular league. Are steady tacklers worth less then big play guys? And so forth. Lineup, roster and scoring will go far to help out.In any case, good luck!

 

[by_tor]

And how are you actually looking at the projections? If you only have 3 on a roster in a 12 team league that is 36 total.

in theory yes, but some teams have 4 and 5 IDPs (which I never understood, but thats another story)

Ok, so how many can you start?And how many can you have on your roster? Total roster requirements would be helpful.

Charlie Watts- you bumping this thread next week w/out a) providing roster, starting, scoring for your league and b) finishing the convo with bonscott is pointless and counterproductive. i'd participate further, but with no background on your particular situation i'd just be generalizing (and you only appear to be interested in specifics). kudos to the staff for turning a rant into a resource

 

[Rushmore]

Charlie Watts- you bumping this thread next week w/out a) providing roster, starting, scoring for your league and b) finishing the convo with bonscott is pointless and counterproductive. i'd participate further, but with no background on your particular situation i'd just be generalizing (and you only appear to be interested in specifics).

kudos to the staff for turning a rant into a resource

 

[oldmandrummer]

And how are you actually looking at the projections? If you only have 3 on a roster in a 12 team league that is 36 total.

in theory yes, but some teams have 4 and 5 IDPs (which I never understood, but thats another story)

Ok, so how many can you start?And how many can you have on your roster? Total roster requirements would be helpful.

Charlie Watts- you bumping this thread next week w/out a) providing roster, starting, scoring for your league and b) finishing the convo with bonscott is pointless and counterproductive. i'd participate further, but with no background on your particular situation i'd just be generalizing (and you only appear to be interested in specifics). kudos to the staff for turning a rant into a resource

That was the whole point of my 'rant'...to open eyes...even if just my own. Yeah, I can post a bazillion stat items about the league I'm in....I guess when I see a DB on top for weeks on end, I only assumed that guy would be a for sure roster slot. I do know any QB that is listed at #1 should and is a roster slot....any RB and WR and TE and Kicker....the same. Sorry for the inference. However, I will swallow my pride and be back next week if my point proves meaningless and Madieu lives up to his name around this neck of the woods. Any top 5 DB should make the highlight reel....lets see this week.

 

[McGarnicle]

Williams is going to get a pick-6 this week, bank on it.

I'm fighting for a playoff spot and I've been frustrated with him lately also. Given what Jene said about the Baltimore matchup, he's gone if he doesn't produce this week.

 

[bonscott]

And how are you actually looking at the projections? If you only have 3 on a roster in a 12 team league that is 36 total.

in theory yes, but some teams have 4 and 5 IDPs (which I never understood, but thats another story)

Ok, so how many can you start?And how many can you have on your roster? Total roster requirements would be helpful.

Charlie Watts- you bumping this thread next week w/out a) providing roster, starting, scoring for your league and b) finishing the convo with bonscott is pointless and counterproductive. i'd participate further, but with no background on your particular situation i'd just be generalizing (and you only appear to be interested in specifics). kudos to the staff for turning a rant into a resource

That was the whole point of my 'rant'...to open eyes...even if just my own. Yeah, I can post a bazillion stat items about the league I'm in....I guess when I see a DB on top for weeks on end, I only assumed that guy would be a for sure roster slot. I do know any QB that is listed at #1 should and is a roster slot....any RB and WR and TE and Kicker....the same. Sorry for the inference. However, I will swallow my pride and be back next week if my point proves meaningless and Madieu lives up to his name around this neck of the woods. Any top 5 DB should make the highlight reel....lets see this week.

You're still not quite getting it. In *YOUR* league Williams doesn't appear to be top 5 anything. Your biggest mistake is that you are looking at each IDP position rankings. You need to look at ALL IDPs in a combined ranking list. Then, as I already pointed out, you'll see that Williams might not even be a Top 40 guy. Thus shouldn't be rostered in your system.Do you understand this? If you combine IDPs into one pool and that's how you roster and start them, then you should never be looking at just the DB list when evaluating your starters or your roster. It needs to be a combined list because that is what your league does.Good luck!

 

[krameruf]

If you are paying good money maybe you should find the article that you pay for that talks about how important YOUR scoring system is to player performance.

 

[oldmandrummer]

And how are you actually looking at the projections? If you only have 3 on a roster in a 12 team league that is 36 total.

in theory yes, but some teams have 4 and 5 IDPs (which I never understood, but thats another story)

Ok, so how many can you start?And how many can you have on your roster? Total roster requirements would be helpful.

Charlie Watts- you bumping this thread next week w/out a) providing roster, starting, scoring for your league and b) finishing the convo with bonscott is pointless and counterproductive. i'd participate further, but with no background on your particular situation i'd just be generalizing (and you only appear to be interested in specifics). kudos to the staff for turning a rant into a resource

That was the whole point of my 'rant'...to open eyes...even if just my own. Yeah, I can post a bazillion stat items about the league I'm in....I guess when I see a DB on top for weeks on end, I only assumed that guy would be a for sure roster slot. I do know any QB that is listed at #1 should and is a roster slot....any RB and WR and TE and Kicker....the same. Sorry for the inference. However, I will swallow my pride and be back next week if my point proves meaningless and Madieu lives up to his name around this neck of the woods. Any top 5 DB should make the highlight reel....lets see this week.

You're still not quite getting it. In *YOUR* league Williams doesn't appear to be top 5 anything. Your biggest mistake is that you are looking at each IDP position rankings. You need to look at ALL IDPs in a combined ranking list. Then, as I already pointed out, you'll see that Williams might not even be a Top 40 guy. Thus shouldn't be rostered in your system.Do you understand this? If you combine IDPs into one pool and that's how you roster and start them, then you should never be looking at just the DB list when evaluating your starters or your roster. It needs to be a combined list because that is what your league does.Good luck!

Do I understand this? You were the one doing the math earlier. 12 team league and you MUST roster at least 3 IDP's. Some guys have 4 and 5 - so based on that (without all the point nuances and breakdowns), in general....williams should roster and I say NOT. Of course there are better IDPs at LB that may score more...as I said earlier, we adjusted our point system this year to make DB's worth more and to 'even the playing field' . Saying we did that.....he is the top DB this week and I will bet my next paycheck that he does NOT perform and score fantasy wise as the highest DB and that being the case, should NOT still be sitting atop the list of DBs....This is NOT rocket science. I realize point system makes a difference....but in General and over the last few weeks, 'we' have been saying maidieu is the #1 DB and continue to assert that....I say HOGWASH

 

[bonscott]

Ok, we can all see that since you refuse to post your scoring system or your roster and starter requirements that you really don't want any help. And any rant you make in the future on this holds no water because you refused to listen.

I've been telling you that in my assumption of your scoring system you should not be starting Williams...period. I don't care what he's "ranked". But we can't make that call for sure because for whatever reason you refuse to post your scoring system. But you would know that yourself if you would properly evaluate players based on your unique scoring system and roster requirments. But again, you don't want help or education, you just want to rant.

I wish you good luck.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

This is mainly for the original poster, but is actuasly good for all of us:

1. Scoring system matters....more than anything else.

2. Lineup requirements matter.

3. Projections are without question the hardest thing to do in fantasy football. They are normally based on probability, and a lot of that is based on the past. We can try all we want to get everything exact, but nobody can say for sure exactly how every player will do.

4. Instead of looking at the exact place a player is ranked, look at the projected fantasy points in any given week. Players can literally move up or down 10-15 places with one tackle. Don't get all hung up on who is ranked 1st or 5th or 20th, as much as looking at the projected points.

5. You complained about Norton ranking Madieu Williams high against Pittsburgh in week 8. Williams is solid in run defense and Pittsburgh runs the ball a lot. They ran 60 plays, including 33 rushing attempts. Now If I knew these numbers in advance, I would be starting any safety who is good in run defense with lousy and/or backup LBs in front of him, as the Bengals have. He SHOULD have been ranked high. Let me tell you something: NOBODY can get EVERY PLAYER right EVERY week. Things happen in a game. Williams had 4 solo tackles of the Bengals 22 total. That is a low number based on the above stats on Pittsburgh in week 8. Now if someone can tell me how I could predict 4 tackles based on the above, let me know because then I will have you predict lotto numbers. THINGS HAPPEN sometimes that we can't predict, and this is one of them.

6. Before the Pittsburgh game, Williams was ranked 2nd in FBG scoring, and I can tell you that anyone in their right mind would play him against Pittsburgh. Good matchup for the #2 overall DB. Just because he didn't have a great game doesn't mean he should not have been rankled/projected better. He SHOULD have been projected at or near the top.

The bottom line is nobody can get every single player right. John Norton is known as "The Guru" here at FBG's...for a reason. He is an IDP expert, and he has forgotten more about IDP's than the rest of us will every know. These projections take an incredible amount of time, and as great as he is, and as much as he knows, there is NO WAY even he can be perfect. The fact is his Williams projection was solid and based on solid research, past history and probability. He didn't get it right...but guess what...if they had to replay the week, I can bet he would rank him at the top again, and so would I. That is the point...just because a player doesn't live up to a projection doesn't mean the projection was bad.

I also think the insults you have tossed around throughout this thread are uncalled for.

 

[J Giles Band]

You guys are not 'perfect'.

The difference is, most guys understand the volativity of projections and use them as guides NOT ABSOLUTES.

If the guy has that much of a beef HE DOESN'T HAVE TO USE THE PROJECTIONS... I don't think anyone is putting a gun to his head. If it broke him up that much to pay for them, maybe he shouldn't have been spending $ on fantasy footbally to begin with....

Just don't pay for them again next year if you don't find them valuable! Geez...

 

[oldmandrummer]

This is mainly for the original poster, but is actuasly good for all of us:

1. Scoring system matters....more than anything else.

2. Lineup requirements matter.

3. Projections are without question the hardest thing to do in fantasy football. They are normally based on probability, and a lot of that is based on the past. We can try all we want to get everything exact, but nobody can say for sure exactly how every player will do.

4. Instead of looking at the exact place a player is ranked, look at the projected fantasy points in any given week. Players can literally move up or down 10-15 places with one tackle. Don't get all hung up on who is ranked 1st or 5th or 20th, as much as looking at the projected points.

5. You complained about Norton ranking Madieu Williams high against Pittsburgh in week 8. Williams is solid in run defense and Pittsburgh runs the ball a lot. They ran 60 plays, including 33 rushing attempts. Now If I knew these numbers in advance, I would be starting any safety who is good in run defense with lousy and/or backup LBs in front of him, as the Bengals have. He SHOULD have been ranked high. Let me tell you something: NOBODY can get EVERY PLAYER right EVERY week. Things happen in a game. Williams had 4 solo tackles of the Bengals 22 total. That is a low number based on the above stats on Pittsburgh in week 8. Now if someone can tell me how I could predict 4 tackles based on the above, let me know because then I will have you predict lotto numbers. THINGS HAPPEN sometimes that we can't predict, and this is one of them.

6. Before the Pittsburgh game, Williams was ranked 2nd in FBG scoring, and I can tell you that anyone in their right mind would play him against Pittsburgh. Good matchup for the #2 overall DB. Just because he didn't have a great game doesn't mean he should not have been rankled/projected better. He SHOULD have been projected at or near the top.

The bottom line is nobody can get every single player right. John Norton is known as "The Guru" here at FBG's...for a reason. He is an IDP expert, and he has forgotten more about IDP's than the rest of us will every know. These projections take an incredible amount of time, and as great as he is, and as much as he knows, there is NO WAY even he can be perfect. The fact is his Williams projection was solid and based on solid research, past history and probability. He didn't get it right...but guess what...if they had to replay the week, I can bet he would rank him at the top again, and so would I. That is the point...just because a player doesn't live up to a projection doesn't mean the projection was bad.

I also think the insults you have tossed around throughout this thread are uncalled for.

I love that you skew this....insults? Care to quote me on any? I see one post that I merely responded to a guy asking "Do you understand this?" So, you may want to go back and re-read. Now, if you detect and 'insulting tone', I will give you that, but don't blatantly throw out that I have 'tossed' out insults THROUGHOUT the thread - that is complete BS I started off my post the way I did thinking it would avert all this 'defense for the projections' and me having to 'prove' myself by listing my team, roster, points total, standing, Soc Sec Number, Visa Card Number, IRA Act and anything else. I know point system matters. I should maybe bold that for you......I know point system matters. Bottom line is if someone is ranked #1 for a few weeks and nets 3 and 4 tackles and nothing else...that is NOT number 1 production. So, yeah, lets project that he will do well against a running team...fine...we will see and I'm going to enjoy coming back next week. I just hope all of you come back and then make more excuses.

So yeah....please show me the insults

 

[cartel]

In one man's opinion, I think this guy is

Can we :IBTL: the thread now?

 

[oldmandrummer]

In one man's opinion, I think this guy is Can we the thread now?

yeah, heaven forbid if someone is of the dissenting opinion (must mean I am tossing out insults all over this thread)....batten down the hatches, get the kids, lock the thread....what is this? Little House on the Prairie. This is FOOTBALL...Grow some nads already :IBTL:

 

[Anthony Borbely]

In one man's opinion, I think this guy is Can we the thread now?

Whether it gets locked or not, I've certainly said all I am going to.

 

[Jene Bramel]

yeah, heaven forbid if someone is of the dissenting opinion (must mean I am tossing out insults all over this thread)....batten down the hatches, get the kids, lock the thread....what is this? Little House on the Prairie. This is FOOTBALL...Grow some nads already

I've locked one thread in two seasons of moderating this forum. I doubt Aaron has locked many more than that. We don't lock threads because of dissenting opinions. We will lock threads that degenerate from discussion of IDP issues to discussion of the personalities involved in posting.I'm looking forward to more discussion of this next week as I still think the larger points are being missed. Rest assured, however, that if next week turns into a "See, I told you so" or "Stop making excuses" or "Poster X doesn't get it" without some general discussion of the concepts and philosophy behind the rankings, this thread will be locked.If oldmandrummer doesn't agree with the rankings and doesn't appreciate the manner in which they're generated after a reasonable discussion, he shouldn't use them. If those that are defending the process can't understand why oldmandrummer doesn't buy the argument, agree to disagree. Both can be done in a civil tone.I'd still very much like to see this thread ignore Madieu Williams altogether and discuss variability and volatility, whether it be related to projections or not. Let's see if we can't get the footballs back in the bag and have a discussion that is worth having. I'll start with the next post.

 

[Jene Bramel]

Sorry for the length of this post. I start out intending to keep these short and sweet and they end up looking like legal "briefs" (sorry redman).

I appreciate the concerns about the weekly rankings and "cheatsheets". I don't do the projections and have refused to do them ( sorry Norton) on more than one occasion because I think the number in the leftmost column can be EXTREMELY misleading. I get that oldmandrummer isn't interested in the arguments why so I won't rehash them again. From my seat, having seen at least four different ways of producing an IDP weekly cheatsheet, there's really no way to make that leftmost column any more meaningful or accurate within a given tier. I've seen the spreadsheets and databases that Norton uses to do these projections. I believe that the trend data they provide allows him to squeeze the most out of the stats available.

Why do the rankings and cheatsheets? Because the masses want them to help make close decisions. I appreciate that too. Were they mine, I'd insist on a three paragraph, not-so-fine-print, disclaimer on the top discussing the limitations of them.

But this post isn't about the cheatsheets. I'm happy to expound on the above if asked. But, in true Bill Cosby form, I told you the story above to tell you this one.

Folks talk about things like "Any Given Sunday" and refer to football as the ultimate team sport for a reason. There are an inordinate number of variables. 500 page playbooks. Specialists on both sides of the ball. On average, 60 plays from scrimmage in any given game to decide an outcome. Injuries, a single big play, etc can change the feel of a game quicker than Britney Spears can ruin a career. A sport with that many variables leads to significant volatility in one week statistics.

To make a gambling analogy, the expected value of placing a bet with a +10 count in blackjack or with top set on an uncoordinated board is high. But not foolproof. Variance happens, and it's more of an issue with small sample sizes. Gamblers, as fake football owners must also, have to learn to accept and ultimately embrace variance. If you're convinced that you've made the right play, don't question the outcome. Find a way to exploit the advantages as best you can, but don't become results oriented.

What effect does variance have in fake football?

Leagues that use fewer starters are going to be subject to higher variance. Players that don't touch the ball often are subject to higher variance. Players who aren't in a defensive position that provides maximum opporunity are subject to higher variance.

To borrow a phrase from oldmandrummer, none of that is rocket science. But it's seriously underappreciated.

Want less volatility and variability in your weekly scores? Avoid big play WRs with low target numbers. Bump the value of a running back who will be on the field running out the clock in close games and catching dump off passes in blowout losses. Look at defensive ends that are two way threats. Ignore all but the best tackling defensive backs. Don't risk multiple poor weeks on 3-4 OLBs.

Have a weekly matchup against a team full of studs? Make that volatility work for you. Search out boom-bust talent in a great matchup. Shoot for a huge week with multiple players; you don't have to hit with all of them but one or two season high weeks will win a game you shouldn't have competed to win.

Your team has the lineup full of studs? Consider your risk tolerance. Use a boring player if your in a tough decision or accept the risk of the big play option knowing you've got a buffer.

If you're relying on us to make the confidence calls for you, consider the following:

In FBG scoring, only two DBs finished in the top 12 in both Week 8 and 9. Zero finished in the top 12 in both Week 7 and 8. Zero finished in the top 12 in both Week 6 and Week 7. The second overall linebacker, Barrett Ruud, has had two weeks with less than five fantasy points. The third overall linebacker, London Fletcher, has had three weeks with less than ten points.

Outside of Tom Brady, there has been no player that is a sure thing every week. Volatility is a part of the game.

I'll reiterate the suggestions I made earlier in the thread. If you don't like volatility, you have options.

1. Find the most consistent option you can roster, ignore the cheatsheets, play him every week and forget it. Move on only when there's a clearly identifiable reason -- injury, position change, obvious decline in ability.

2. Trade multiple above-average players for a consistent stud wherever you can, depth be damned.

3. Convince your league to add more lineup slots in the future. Use an offensive flex, add IDPs, add IDP positions, etc.

4. Get in more leagues. Seriously, you can't have bad luck in all of them, right?

If you don't like volatility and can't adjust to the conditions, find another hobby. If you'll indulge a story about two of my leagues, consider that a dynasty team that began the year with Brees, LT/LJ, Evans/Holt/CJ/RWilliams, Witten, WillSmith/VDB/Bulluck/ZThomas/Ruud/Fletcher/AWilson/TPolamalu among others is currently under .500. In another league, an owner who has scored more than 200 points than anyone else in the league STILL has the highest points scored against.

Variance and volatility is the 12th man of fantasy football. Learn to love him.

 

[Anthony Borbely]

I am going to add a point about just how tough this is. I am going to use an example from my weekly "IDP Strong/Weak play article". For those not familiar with it, it is subscriber content, and I try to pick 6 players every week that I feel are strong or weak plays based on matchups. I do not pick no brainer studs to start, nor do I pick scrubs to not start. I pick the tough players who make up the borderline weekly starters for many teams. This may seem easy, but I can guarantee it is not. My goal is to hit on 60% of my picks over the course of the season. Another thing I hope to do is stimulate people to think, using my reasoning for the players I use in this article.

The reason I mention this pertains to projecting how a player may do.

I am going to use a specific player from last week to make a point. The player is Minnesota DE Ray Edwards. I selected Edwards as a player in the weak play side of the article. I mention in the article every week how tough it is to pick a DL, namely because when they get a sack, they not only get points for the sack, but they also get a tackle. In FBG scoring, a tackle is 1.5 points, and a sack is 4 points. That alone makes the sack worth 5.5 points. I use 7 points as a cutoff for a good/bad game for a DL, so as you can see, if a player gets so much as one more tackle, he hits the cutoff.

Edwards made one play in the entire game, he sacked Rivers and on the play, forced a fumble, which is another 4 points. He finished with 9.5 points because of this single play. If not for this, he would have had a ZERO.

This is just one example of the volatility of projecting IDP's. There are so many things that can happen during a game that it is just not humanly possible to pick every player every week. Tell me who could have predicted Barrett Ruud to not have one single tackle in the first half of last weeks game? But I can guarantee I don't know anyone who would have him out of their lineup. Nobody in their right mind could have predicted David Harris to have an insane 20 solo tackles last week. Or how about James Harrison Monday night? Who can predict that?

Madieu Williams was second in FBG scoring before the week 8 game against the Steelers. He should have been near the top of anyones list of DB projections no matter how they formulate the list. Just because he had 4 solo tackles doesn't mean it was a bad projection. It just proves that, same as the above list of players, that it is impossible to predict every possible statistic that happens in a game.

Take a look at the Ray Edwards line from above. I listed him as a weak play in my article. On ONE SINGLE PLAY in the game, he did something. He did nothing else for the rest of the game. ONE PLAY turned him into a strong play and caused me to be wrong. Was it a bad call by me? The information I used to list him as a bad play was solid, and he was only involved in a single play for the entire game. But nonetheless, he was a player I missed on based on the criteria. I have lucked into hitting players like this the same way, so this is not a case of me making excuses; it works both ways.

The point is too many things can happen in a game to make projecting a prefect science. There is no way anyone can predict any player. If Williams had gotten lucky like Edwards and caused a fumble, he would have had a higher score and we would not be having this discussion.

 

[oldmandrummer]

Volatility is crucial, no doubt. What I love is when an NFL team can score 3 points the whole game and your opponent has that guy that scored 40 fantasy points when his team scored only 3 in real life.

I look at it in more simplistic terms. For ex...if williams gets 3 takles one week and 4 another. I'm not going to make the assumption that he will now warrant a #1 slot at DB based on anything other than playing against A MAC division team.

BTW - I will post point system later

 

[philly_battery_thrower]

If you want to adjust rankings based on prior week scores, you could probably get that info directly from your leagues Stat page. If I benched good players that had a few bad weeks in a row, I would have made poor decisions:

Marlin Jackson - Weeks 5-9: 2.25, B, 7.50, 3.00, 11.25 (would have been a bad decision to bench in week 9 b/c of he had a couple bad weeks)

Jamal Lewis - Weeks 1-9: 2.10, 27.60, 8.30, 12.40, 1.10, B, 6.10, 35.40 (how can you predict the 35 points last week based on the previous weeks?)

Wes Welker - Weeks 1-9: 13.60, 11.70, 8.40, 5.65, 2.90, 27.15, 28.05, 17.15, 11.05 (glad I didn't bench WW after a few average/poor weeks in the middle of the season)

I could go on here, but the point is that because of the volatility, you can't just base a projection on the last 2 weeks (assuming no injuries or major changes). In fact, I'd bet there's a better chance that a quality player regresses to the mean following a couple bad weeks.

And btw, I have Madieu on my team and yes, I'm starting him again this week...

 

[gregjcross]

I agree, rankings can easily be "misleading," yet it certainly doesnt make them wrong or a waste . The reader's approach to interpretation is what will guide your fate --not the list. Wisdom is nothign without perspective.Example: I know im overly biased to most of my rostered players, so if im choosing to ignore that Stephen Cooper (who i dont have) is going to beat out "my" pet signing-- Matt Wilhelm-- for tackles at ILB every week in SD's 3-4 alignment, I can use FBG to quickly sober up by looking at the weekly rankings --then notice that Cooper is a good 10 or 15 spots ranked ahead of Wilhelm. If I still choose to start Wilhelm every week, I know its my choice, but I paid the fee so that I could have had the chance to have known better. Rankings may not make me cut Wilhelm, but makes me think twice and apply the added perspective. On the flip side........ In my dynasty this year I started playing Michael Boley as a starter in week 2 or 3--well ahead of his break out numbers (this was in place of Tedi Bruschi) I made this high pay-off line-up change *not* because i was following FBG (or any other) ranking set religiously -- but because I'm paying attention to MY PLAYERS and their situations. No rankings could have predicted Boley's break out, God himself could not have predicted it. Some of this stuff is purely luck and other times just watching closely. End of the day, My own gut is what I go with. If i wanted to run a fantasy team by using strictly a ranking service to make weekly decisions and even draft my team; there wouldnt be much point in playing (?) I certainly wouldnt chalk my failures up to a ranking sheet.

Sorry for the length of this post. I start out intending to keep these short and sweet and they end up looking like legal "briefs" (sorry redman).I appreciate the concerns about the weekly rankings and "cheatsheets". I don't do the projections and have refused to do them ( sorry Norton) on more than one occasion because I think the number in the leftmost column can be EXTREMELY misleading. I get that oldmandrummer isn't interested in the arguments why so I won't rehash them again. From my seat, having seen at least four different ways of producing an IDP weekly cheatsheet, there's really no way to make that leftmost column any more meaningful or accurate within a given tier. I've seen the spreadsheets and databases that Norton uses to do these projections. I believe that the trend data they provide allows him to squeeze the most out of the stats available. Why do the rankings and cheatsheets? Because the masses want them to help make close decisions. I appreciate that too. Were they mine, I'd insist on a three paragraph, not-so-fine-print, disclaimer on the top discussing the limitations of them. But this post isn't about the cheatsheets. I'm happy to expound on the above if asked. But, in true Bill Cosby form, I told you the story above to tell you this one.Folks talk about things like "Any Given Sunday" and refer to football as the ultimate team sport for a reason. There are an inordinate number of variables. 500 page playbooks. Specialists on both sides of the ball. On average, 60 plays from scrimmage in any given game to decide an outcome. Injuries, a single big play, etc can change the feel of a game quicker than Britney Spears can ruin a career. A sport with that many variables leads to significant volatility in one week statistics. To make a gambling analogy, the expected value of placing a bet with a +10 count in blackjack or with top set on an uncoordinated board is high. But not foolproof. Variance happens, and it's more of an issue with small sample sizes. Gamblers, as fake football owners must also, have to learn to accept and ultimately embrace variance. If you're convinced that you've made the right play, don't question the outcome. Find a way to exploit the advantages as best you can, but don't become results oriented. What effect does variance have in fake football?Leagues that use fewer starters are going to be subject to higher variance. Players that don't touch the ball often are subject to higher variance. Players who aren't in a defensive position that provides maximum opporunity are subject to higher variance. To borrow a phrase from oldmandrummer, none of that is rocket science. But it's seriously underappreciated.Want less volatility and variability in your weekly scores? Avoid big play WRs with low target numbers. Bump the value of a running back who will be on the field running out the clock in close games and catching dump off passes in blowout losses. Look at defensive ends that are two way threats. Ignore all but the best tackling defensive backs. Don't risk multiple poor weeks on 3-4 OLBs.Have a weekly matchup against a team full of studs? Make that volatility work for you. Search out boom-bust talent in a great matchup. Shoot for a huge week with multiple players; you don't have to hit with all of them but one or two season high weeks will win a game you shouldn't have competed to win. Your team has the lineup full of studs? Consider your risk tolerance. Use a boring player if your in a tough decision or accept the risk of the big play option knowing you've got a buffer.If you're relying on us to make the confidence calls for you, consider the following:In FBG scoring, only two DBs finished in the top 12 in both Week 8 and 9. Zero finished in the top 12 in both Week 7 and 8. Zero finished in the top 12 in both Week 6 and Week 7. The second overall linebacker, Barrett Ruud, has had two weeks with less than five fantasy points. The third overall linebacker, London Fletcher, has had three weeks with less than ten points. Outside of Tom Brady, there has been no player that is a sure thing every week. Volatility is a part of the game.I'll reiterate the suggestions I made earlier in the thread. If you don't like volatility, you have options.1. Find the most consistent option you can roster, ignore the cheatsheets, play him every week and forget it. Move on only when there's a clearly identifiable reason -- injury, position change, obvious decline in ability.2. Trade multiple above-average players for a consistent stud wherever you can, depth be damned. 3. Convince your league to add more lineup slots in the future. Use an offensive flex, add IDPs, add IDP positions, etc.4. Get in more leagues. Seriously, you can't have bad luck in all of them, right? If you don't like volatility and can't adjust to the conditions, find another hobby. If you'll indulge a story about two of my leagues, consider that a dynasty team that began the year with Brees, LT/LJ, Evans/Holt/CJ/RWilliams, Witten, WillSmith/VDB/Bulluck/ZThomas/Ruud/Fletcher/AWilson/TPolamalu among others is currently under .500. In another league, an owner who has scored more than 200 points than anyone else in the league STILL has the highest points scored against.Variance and volatility is the 12th man of fantasy football. Learn to love him.

 

[redman]

Volatility is crucial, no doubt. What I love is when an NFL team can score 3 points the whole game and your opponent has that guy that scored 40 fantasy points when his team scored only 3 in real life.

I look at it in more simplistic terms. For ex...if williams gets 3 takles one week and 4 another. I'm not going to make the assumption that he will now warrant a #1 slot at DB based on anything other than playing against A MAC division team.

BTW - I will post point system later

You mind pointing me to an example of that because I sincerely doubt that in anything but the most :11: scoring system a player could put up 40 points without scoring any TD's. It's only fair because, you know, you were asking for examples of you being insulting. I'd also like to see your projections for your team's starting IDP's this week. I'd think at this point that that would be fair as well.

 

[krameruf]

1 assist in the first half.

 

[bonscott]

Volatility is crucial, no doubt. What I love is when an NFL team can score 3 points the whole game and your opponent has that guy that scored 40 fantasy points when his team scored only 3 in real life.

I look at it in more simplistic terms. For ex...if williams gets 3 takles one week and 4 another. I'm not going to make the assumption that he will now warrant a #1 slot at DB based on anything other than playing against A MAC division team.

BTW - I will post point system later

You mind pointing me to an example of that because I sincerely doubt that in anything but the most :11: scoring system a player could put up 40 points without scoring any TD's. It's only fair because, you know, you were asking for examples of you being insulting. I'd also like to see your projections for your team's starting IDP's this week. I'd think at this point that that would be fair as well.

It's pretty easy. Tory Holt had 22.40 points in one of my leagues today in standard scoring and he didn't score. I've seen WRs get over 200 yards and 10+ catches and not score. That would certainly be near 40 pts.

 

[bonscott]

1 assist in the first half.

And the Ravens have put up not much of an offense today. So far.

 

[redman]

Volatility is crucial, no doubt. What I love is when an NFL team can score 3 points the whole game and your opponent has that guy that scored 40 fantasy points when his team scored only 3 in real life.

I look at it in more simplistic terms. For ex...if williams gets 3 takles one week and 4 another. I'm not going to make the assumption that he will now warrant a #1 slot at DB based on anything other than playing against A MAC division team.

BTW - I will post point system later

You mind pointing me to an example of that because I sincerely doubt that in anything but the most :11: scoring system a player could put up 40 points without scoring any TD's. It's only fair because, you know, you were asking for examples of you being insulting. I'd also like to see your projections for your team's starting IDP's this week. I'd think at this point that that would be fair as well.

It's pretty easy. Tory Holt had 22.40 points in one of my leagues today in standard scoring and he didn't score. I've seen WRs get over 200 yards and 10+ catches and not score. That would certainly be near 40 pts.

Let's examine this. Here are the single game leaders in receiving yards and receptions from NFL.com:
Most Yards Gained, Game 336 Willie Anderson, L.A. Rams vs. New Orleans, Nov. 26, 1989 (OT) 309 Stephone Paige, Kansas City vs. San Diego, Dec. 22, 1985 303 Jim Benton, Cleveland vs. Detroit, Nov. 22, 1945

Most Pass Receptions, Game 20 Terrell Owens, San Francisco vs. Chicago, Dec. 17, 2000  18 Tom Fears, Los Angeles vs. Green Bay, Dec. 3, 1950  17 Clark Gaines, N.Y. Jets vs. San Francisco, Sept. 21, 1980

We can already agree that in a standard performance scoring league (non-PPR; .1/yard receiving), nobody qualifies by getting 40 points. Standard PPR is .5/reception. And yes, I do recognize that some leagues do it differently, but standard is .5/rec. If you take Terrell Owens' # of receptions and add that to Willie Anderson's 336-yard game - in other words you cherry pick the top two games ever by a receiver and combine their best numbers - you've got a guy who caught 20 passes for 336 yards . . . and scored 43.6 points.

How many times has that happened?

*Edit- we were discussing players that put up that number of yards without scoring a TD. TO's statline from that 20-catch game was 20/283/1. I'm willing to bet Flipper Anderson had at least one TD in his game too, though I'm still looking for the stats fromthat game.

 

[-OZ-]

benched Roy for him today

 

[krameruf]

1 assist. terrible. I've had it with db's this year. i'm going to start playing favorable matchups each week and just keep picking up off the wire.