Mark Wimer (1 Viewer)

[Slinger]

15)HILTON

 

[Slinger]

Wimer has always been the one to have very different Rankings.

Yep. Which tells me it's not really just happening to have diff. rankings, but purposely making sure his rankings are different/"controversial" as some kind of attention-getter thing. ie he comes up with the contrary rankings first, rationales (or should I say rationalizations?) later. PS I'm all for differing opinions; I'd just rather it be more up front, ie maybe FBG could have him as the sort of token "contrary staff member," purposely making most/all of his rankings against the grain w/justification why.

Or maybe he sees that a majority of the time the "standard" rankings are always wrong so he digs in a little deeper and comes up with a different scenerio.

 

[BigRed]

Or maybe he sees that a majority of the time the "standard" rankings are always wrong so he digs in a little deeper and comes up with a different scenerio.

Or maybe lmao.I'm not exactly buying that he (or anyone else, not aimed at him per se) consistently digs way deeper than everyone else and achieves some amazing FF nirvana that no one else has.

I'm also not getting the logic of something always being wrong a majority of the time. Is that also a higher conciousness thing?

 

[Marc Levin]

Wimer has always been the one to have very different Rankings.

Yep. Which tells me it's not really just happening to have diff. rankings, but purposely making sure his rankings are different/"controversial" as some kind of attention-getter thing. ie he comes up with the contrary rankings first, rationales (or should I say rationalizations?) later.

As Shick! mentioned, hit Wimer with a PM and I'm sure he'll respond here on particular players.

I have drafted with Mark several times, and, this early in the season, he has firm beliefs about how certain situations will shake out.

By the end of TC and beginning of PS, more "reason" and less "belief" emerges in ALL our rankings.

 

[Mark Wimer]

Wimer has always been the one to have very different Rankings.

Yep. Which tells me it's not really just happening to have diff. rankings, but purposely making sure his rankings are different/"controversial" as some kind of attention-getter thing. ie he comes up with the contrary rankings first, rationales (or should I say rationalizations?) later.

As Shick! mentioned, hit Wimer with a PM and I'm sure he'll respond here on particular players.

I have drafted with Mark several times, and, this early in the season, he has firm beliefs about how certain situations will shake out.

By the end of TC and beginning of PS, more "reason" and less "belief" emerges in ALL our rankings.

Thanks for rebutting the "wants to be controversial" sentiment, Marc. You're right, it's not true.I do my level best to give my own perspective, based on the developing situations on all 32 teams. Maybe some of the posters in this thread aren't aware, but the fact is that I and Joe B. write the rushing/passing matchups every week during regular season and post season. It's not like I just look at yearly statistics and then make wild guesses about who will end up where the following season. I am very plugged into the offensive/defensive trends on the 32 teams because I look at those statistics indepth each and every week of the regular and post season, in order to write the weekly material that I submit to the site. I am also the guy who pounds out the Monday Injury Report, BTW, so overall I've been steeped in the NFL action/player injuries/status from week 1 to the SuperBowl.

I guess what I'm saying is that my perspective on the various NFL players tends to be allied to weekly performance the previous year. The bottom line for me on Steven Jackson (to pick one "outlier" on this year's early cut of rankings), is that he wasn't very consistent from week to week, and he tanked in the second half of the 2005 season. Part of it was due to his OL not opening holes (look at Coach Vitt's comments I quoted in week 14 last year, after the Washington fiasco on Jackson's part). Vitt: "No Running Lanes for Jackson vs. Washington, wk 13 2005". The Rams made no significant personnel moves on the OL during the off-season, as our Chris Smith pointed out in the Footballguys.com strategy guide this year. As I pointed out in the thread on Santana Moss (for Couch Potato and the Pool), Santana Moss thread, Moss was worth 2-5 FP 9 of the 16 weeks last year - he was unpredictable and erratic in his production. Given all the quality imports at WR this season, I really expect to see him drop to fantasy WR3 levels. I know that's not a common prediction, but when I see a team be as agressive in free agency/trading as the Redskins were at WR, that says to me that the brass is not happy with the current stable. The new stable will limit Moss's fantasy production this year, although the Redskins passing attack as a whole may actually be a whole lot better (read that whole Moss thread for more on this, as the other posters in the thread had a lot of quality points they drew out of other articles written here at Footballguys.com).

When people review previous years rankings on my part, one will easily find some very good calls (like me having Larry Fitzgerald among the top 5 at WR during the preseason last year, when a lot of critics told me I was nuts for ranking Fitzgerald over Boldin) and some very bad calls (My Quentin Griffin enthusiasm from 2004 and my arguments with Pony Boy are well-documented). That's the nature of this business. If I was always right about every player and every team's prospects, I'd live in Vegas and be a kajillioniare. Of course, nobody is always right about every player and every team's prospects.

However, anyone who asserts that I am going for shock value or novelty for the sake of sensation is on the wrong track.

I do my own, independent research, projections and rankings, I go through the process of defending and refining them (for which this board is quite invaluable), and then I await the pre-season training camps/games for either validation or rejection of my preliminary opinions. Then, the process of defending/refining/resubmitting the rankings goes forward until we hit regular season, and draft season is over.

I am intellectually honest and my rankings/projections are my best estimate of what any particular player is likely to do come 2006 regular season, given current information and the reports emmanating from the OTAs/mini-camps. However, as Marc points out, I can guarantee that a lot will change on everyones' rankings between now and September. Injuries, arrests, roster shakeups galore are ahead of us.

That's why FF is so FUN!

Enjoy y'all!

MW

 

[Jeff Pasquino]

Or Maurile Tremblay's ranking of Ashley Lelie at WR38 when he'll be his team's WR3 at best, or traded to who-knows-what kind of situation, or will hold out at worst.

Oops. Simple explanation: You caught an error.

Ah ha! Caught ya! I give Maurile a lot of credit for fessing up publicly when he could have just quietly changed it. I'm impressed. I know Jeff P. also made a change on a ranking earlier this offseason (I don't remember what) when someone asked him to give it further scrutiny.

I have no problem with outlying rankings if the person can somehow support them. If he can't, perhaps there is an error (as in this case) or some missed news (it happens), which could be caught if the outlying ranking had to be explained. I'm really not lobbying for a full-blown explanation in each case like Wimer gave concerning Jackson, but just something that gives me a sense that the staffmember thought it through and can let us know why he thought differently than most about a player.

I do wonder if the FBG brass underestimate how much subscribers in general rely on the consensus rankings (not me of course, who has a crystal ball I rely on ). I know it's cool to say make your own decisions, but the majority of people are going to rely on the 'experts.'

I think I was a little low on a QB or something.It happens.

Personally I don't mind at all if someone wonders about my rankings. Ask away (separate thread - no hijacking here - although I doubt Mark would mind).

Either I can support my "out of the box" thoughts or I made a boo-boo. Either way, you get a better understanding of (A) where I'm coming from and (B) improved confidence in the rankings.