New and Improved FBG Expert Rankings (1 Viewer)

[David Dodds]

Now with the ability to exclude different rankers. Includes sortable columns for mean, median, and adjusted average (throwing out the low and high) against selected rankers.

Thanks for everyone that made these suggestions earlier. Thanks also goes to Doug Drinen who programmed these changes.

Redraft Rankings

Dynasty Rankings

Rookie Rankings

 

[PatsWillWin]

Wow. These are excellent.

 

[JayMan]

Now with the ability to exclude different rankers. Includes sortable columns for mean, median, and adjusted average (throwing out the low and high) against selected rankers.

Thanks for everyone that made these suggestions earlier.

Redraft Rankings

Dynasty Rankings

Rookie Rankings

Very neat... thanks!.. .glad to see that FBG is listening to the great conversations that are going on when trying to improve the service to it's subscribers!

 

[lions327]

 

[george]

GREAT! Like that folks can decide which "average" to use. Did away with that whole debate

BUt my favorite part is that redraft/dynasty/rookie is now a dropdown. Thanks!

 

[Blackjacks]

Now with the ability to exclude different rankers. Includes sortable columns for mean, median, and adjusted average (throwing out the low and high) against selected rankers.

Thanks for everyone that made these suggestions earlier.

Redraft Rankings

Dynasty Rankings

Rookie Rankings

Great new rankings but one ?.I'm a Plax owner and i don't get not one expect ranking him where he has finished the last 2 years (#11, #12)

No one has him ranked better than #14. What are the reasons for the projected drop in #'s. I would think losing Barber would help Plax's #'s due to more looks.

I know this isn't a Plax forum but just saw that and wanted to ask.

Again, great rankings

 

[roarlions]

Wow. These are excellent.

 

[Jiggyonthehut]

Great idea and some good effort put into these rankings, but I cant help but feel :shuked: about some of these rankings.

 

[AnonymousBob]

Some will still nitpick over the rankings themselves but I think we can all agree this feature is absolutely incredible.

Thanks fbg's.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

Rookie IDP rankings no longer work

 

[aposulli]

:championshiiiip:

 

[wannabee]

looks great

 

[PatsWillWin]

Great idea and some good effort put into these rankings, but I cant help but feel :shuked: about some of these rankings.

Well the beauty is you can now cross off people that tend to shuke you.Beats the hell out of copying it into Excel and deleting the columns that way.

 

[KellysHeroes]

No love for Bulger STILL

7 Marc Bulger, STL 8 7 8 7 7.5 7.5 7.5

IDP Side

18 Kirk Morrison, OAK 17 19 17 17.7 17.0 17.0

am I missing something here, the guy was top 10 last yr and will be on the field all day every game.

Bloom is Hatin G Wilson eh

9 Gibril Wilson, NYG 6 5 20

 

[inca911]

Can we get deviation too, pretty please!

I like to nominate high standard deviation players early as they tend to go for the max amounts. Leaves me more $ to play with....

 

[Curado Kev]

Good Stuff..

I wish I knew more about the contributors, I'm not sure who is any good and who's not..I guess I'll keep all the ratings and just sort'em...

It does help - Thanks Kev

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Bloom is Hatin G Wilson eh

9 Gibril Wilson, NYG 6 5 20

Thats dynasty - Wilson will be an FA next year, and I dont like that uncertainty looming since he's coming off a so-so season. In redraft I have him at 12 - still the low man, but again, since he's not under contract next year, I think that could make him vulnerable to get pulled for Butler or Johnson if he falters - he might not be in their plans next year unless he returns to form.If I hear that he's taking well to the Steve Spagnuolo regime in training camp, and then he follows it up with a good start, he'll be back in the single digits in both rankings.

 

[David Yudkin]

No love for Bulger STILL7 Marc Bulger, STL 8 7 8 7 7.5 7.5 7.5

I have him the highest of the staff at #3. Can't tell you why the others are not as keen on him . . .

 

[chook]

Well the beauty is you can now cross off people that tend to shuke you.Beats the hell out of copying it into Excel and deleting the columns that way.

Yep. Good stuff FBG's!

 

[Doug Drinen]

Rookie IDP rankings no longer work

Fixed now.Thanks.

 

[radballs]

Can we get deviation too, pretty please!I like to nominate high standard deviation players early as they tend to go for the max amounts. Leaves me more $ to play with....

 

[radballs]

Very cool. Now, will we be able to tailor the rankings toward individual scoring systems? I couldn't remember if this was going to be an option or not. Or are the rankings done ordinally and not by each staffer's projections? And will the "Player Spotlight" numbers become one of the options here once they're completed?

 

[BassNBrew]

 

[Jiggyonthehut]

Great idea and some good effort put into these rankings, but I cant help but feel :shuked: about some of these rankings.

Well the beauty is you can now cross off people that tend to shuke you.Beats the hell out of copying it into Excel and deleting the columns that way.

I didn't catch that at first. Great feature indeed. Thanks GB.

 

[noneother]

Rookie IDP rankings no longer work

Fixed now.Thanks.

awesome stuff thanks... please check rookie WR too

 

[Doug Drinen]

Rookie IDP rankings no longer work

Fixed now.Thanks.

awesome stuff thanks... please check rookie WR too

There are no rookie WR rankings. For rookies, there is only overall and IDP overall.

 

[noneother]

Rookie IDP rankings no longer work

Fixed now.Thanks.

awesome stuff thanks... please check rookie WR too

There are no rookie WR rankings. For rookies, there is only overall and IDP overall.

ah...got it...thanks

 

[pizzatyme]

Now with the ability to exclude different rankers. Includes sortable columns for mean, median, and adjusted average (throwing out the low and high) against selected rankers.

Thanks for everyone that made these suggestions earlier. Thanks also goes to Doug Drinen who programmed these changes.

Redraft Rankings

Dynasty Rankings

Rookie Rankings

Not the only one but one of many who suggested this.

 

[Jene Bramel]

IDP Side18 Kirk Morrison, OAK 17 19 17 17.7 17.0 17.0 am I missing something here, the guy was top 10 last yr and will be on the field all day every game.

Morrison was 17th overall in 2006 in FBG scoring. He made 102 solo tackles last year on the field all the time and saw his coverage stats increase pretty solidly. I don't know that there's much more upside there.And, as always, I like to recommend considering the IDP rankings as a series of tiers. Morrison would be in that large glut of low level LB1 -- high LB2 talent. He could conceivably be anywhere from 9 to 25 on my personal list. I know that kind of defeats the purpose of numerically ranking players, but then a 1-60 ranking is artificial to me anyway. While I tried to rank them as I'd pull them off a draft board, the numerical ranking really doesn't reflect how close some of the players truly are in the big picture.

 

[phthalatemagic]

Kudos! I bet the Q test got dissed though. I hope whoever was defending the valor of the mean rankings isn't kicking and screaming now.

 

[greyone]

As usual nice work FBGers. The up/down link is helpful too. Many thanks.

***where did it go?***List that used red/blue to indicate recent shifts in rankings.

 

[Bada Bing]

Rookie IDP rankings no longer work

Fixed now.Thanks.

awesome stuff thanks... please check rookie WR too

There are no rookie WR rankings. For rookies, there is only overall and IDP overall.

Is this not possible? I would like to see this.

 

[KellysHeroes]

IDP Side18 Kirk Morrison, OAK 17 19 17 17.7 17.0 17.0 am I missing something here, the guy was top 10 last yr and will be on the field all day every game.

Morrison was 17th overall in 2006 in FBG scoring. He made 102 solo tackles last year on the field all the time and saw his coverage stats increase pretty solidly. I don't know that there's much more upside there.And, as always, I like to recommend considering the IDP rankings as a series of tiers. Morrison would be in that large glut of low level LB1 -- high LB2 talent. He could conceivably be anywhere from 9 to 25 on my personal list. I know that kind of defeats the purpose of numerically ranking players, but then a 1-60 ranking is artificial to me anyway. While I tried to rank them as I'd pull them off a draft board, the numerical ranking really doesn't reflect how close some of the players truly are in the big picture.

That sounds better....

 

[Doug Drinen]

There are no rookie WR rankings. For rookies, there is only overall and IDP overall.

Is this not possible? I would like to see this.

I've rigged up something that I think will give you what you want. Rookie WR rankings

 

[The Mechanic]

There are no rookie WR rankings. For rookies, there is only overall and IDP overall.

Is this not possible? I would like to see this.

I've rigged up something that I think will give you what you want. Rookie WR rankings

Atta BOY DOUG!!!

 

[Bada Bing]

There are no rookie WR rankings. For rookies, there is only overall and IDP overall.

Is this not possible? I would like to see this.

I've rigged up something that I think will give you what you want. Rookie WR rankings

That helps. Thanks!

 

[BigJim®]

It's curious that Pasquino, Grant and Smith each have M.Lynch rated ahead of Calvin Johnson on their overall dynasty rankings, yet they rank Lynch behind Calvin Johnson in rookie rankings.

 

[Da Guru]

Now with the ability to exclude different rankers. Includes sortable columns for mean, median, and adjusted average (throwing out the low and high) against selected rankers.

Thanks for everyone that made these suggestions earlier. Thanks also goes to Doug Drinen who programmed these changes.

Redraft Rankings

Dynasty Rankings

Rookie Rankings

Good job throwing out the high and lows.

 

[Doug Drinen]

As usual nice work FBGers. The up/down link is helpful too. Many thanks.***where did it go?***List that used red/blue to indicate recent shifts in rankings.

The up-down link needed a little adjustment, but it's back now.

 

[JayMan]

Maybe I'm reading this wrong...

The behavior of the leftmost column (Current Rankings) changes depending on how you sort the list:

If you sort the list any other way (e.g. by a particular ranker), the leftmost column reflects the players' ranks according to the mean. This allows you to see how a particular ranker's rankings differ from the consensus.

example

If I only select Pasquino's ranking... the leftmost column ranks are showing only Pasquino's rankings and not the consensus/mean ranking...

 

[Doug Drinen]

Maybe I'm reading this wrong...

The behavior of the leftmost column (Current Rankings) changes depending on how you sort the list:

If you sort the list any other way (e.g. by a particular ranker), the leftmost column reflects the players' ranks according to the mean. This allows you to see how a particular ranker's rankings differ from the consensus.

example

If I only select Pasquino's ranking... the leftmost column ranks are showing only Pasquino's rankings and not the consensus/mean ranking...

There are a lot of ins and outs here, and it looks like I wasn't clear enough.If you exclude a ranker, then all the computed columns (current rankings, AVG, Mdn, AAV) act like that person does not exist. So if you exclude every ranker but one, as you did in your example, then the "consensus" is just that person's rankings.

What I was trying to convey is that if you sort by a particular ranker (by clicking the arrow beneath his name), then the lefthand column will preserve the consensus (average) ranks (of the rankers who have not been excluded). Like this.

 

[Doug Drinen]

Can we get deviation too, pretty please!I like to nominate high standard deviation players early as they tend to go for the max amounts. Leaves me more $ to play with....

Alright, this is for the seriously 1. Add this to end of the URL: &stdev=12. Mouse over a player's name.

 

[JayMan]

Can we get deviation too, pretty please!I like to nominate high standard deviation players early as they tend to go for the max amounts. Leaves me more $ to play with....

Alright, this is for the seriously 1. Add this to end of the URL: &stdev=12. Mouse over a player's name.

Woa!... nice!... (never noticed before that you had the player's age and experience when mousing over)

 

[spec1alk]

No love for Bulger STILL7 Marc Bulger, STL 8 7 8 7 7.5 7.5 7.5

I have him the highest of the staff at #3. Can't tell you why the others are not as keen on him . . .

Maybe because last year was his first 16 game season?

 

[phthalatemagic]

Can we get deviation too, pretty please!I like to nominate high standard deviation players early as they tend to go for the max amounts. Leaves me more $ to play with....

Alright, this is for the seriously 1. Add this to end of the URL: &stdev=12. Mouse over a player's name.

Cool!Question - why did you create a function to throw out highest and lowest instead of performing a proper test for outliers?

 

[rolliehouliranson]

Question - why did you create a function to throw out highest and lowest instead of performing a proper test for outliers?

OOOHHH!!! Great question!!I would like to see outliers automatically excluded.

 

[phthalatemagic]

Question - why did you create a function to throw out highest and lowest instead of performing a proper test for outliers?

OOOHHH!!! Great question!!I would like to see outliers automatically excluded.

It seemed like he arbitrarily did it by giving us an option to throw out highs/lows, but what if those values are legitimate? Why not just employ an official and tested means to do so? I don't mind an option instead of automatically doing it, becuase some don't agree with throwing out outliers, but some would at least like to see it without having to manipulate the data in our own spreadsheets.

 

[ILUVBEER99]

Damn Doug, this is good stuff.

 

[3nOut]

Can we get deviation too, pretty please!I like to nominate high standard deviation players early as they tend to go for the max amounts. Leaves me more $ to play with....

Alright, this is for the seriously 1. Add this to end of the URL: &stdev=12. Mouse over a player's name.

Cool!Question - why did you create a function to throw out highest and lowest instead of performing a proper test for outliers?

Sorry, what is an outlier and what kind of tests do you have for it?

 

[rolliehouliranson]

From where I come from, an outlier is anything crazier than:

1.5 multipled by the interquartile range, added and subtracted from the submedians.

So, find the median of the data, find the median of each side of the data. Subtract those "submedians" to find the interquartile range.

Multiply the IQR times 1.5, add it to the upper submedian, and subtract it from the lower submedian.

Anything outside of that range is considered "crazy" and is excluded.