NFLDraftGuys Feedback/Suggestions/Criticism Thread (1 Viewer)

[Sigmund Bloom]

Folks, Draftguys has been chugging along for a little over a month now, and we couldn't be more pleased with our test run. Our audience is growing and our writers are producing some of the best content out there. None of it would be possible without the great community we have here to give us a head start.

So, now I want to give everyone a chance to tell us what we are doing right and doing wrong. What we should be doing that we're not, and what we shouldn't be doing that we are, and so on.

Disclaimer: This version of the site was only meant for a test run. The "real" site will have a completely different look and feel and have a robust backbone of player rankings and scouting reports. So specific comments about this site's look and feel and navigation, while welcome, will be irrelevant in a few months. Of course, general comments about look and feel and navigation are always appreciated.

The bottom line is this: We made this site with this community in mind, and we want to make it the best it can be when we "re-launch" in the fall. Thanks for giving us your valuable time and attention and we hope that our work will help you enjoy the draft.

The floor is open for comments...

 

[theedge]

Thanks guys,

I like what yall have done so far. I really like the new (to me anyway) links you've provided. New Era, and Rookiepedia. What I would really like is a site that offers profiles on nearly all the possible draft picks, similar to a site I used years ago. I think it was called Draftbook, not sure though.

Keep up the good work.

 

[dirtyhalos]

i'd like to see some player pages ala fbgs

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Thanks guys,

I like what yall have done so far. I really like the new (to me anyway) links you've provided. New Era, and Rookiepedia. What I would really like is a site that offers profiles on nearly all the possible draft picks, similar to a site I used years ago. I think it was called Draftbook, not sure though.

Keep up the good work.

i'd like to see some player pages ala fbgs

Player page/profiles of all possible draft picks is in our plans for next year. Other than the obvious stats and scouting reports is there anything in particular you'd like to see on those pages?

 

[dirtyhalos]

Thanks guys,

I like what yall have done so far. I really like the new (to me anyway) links you've provided. New Era, and Rookiepedia. What I would really like is a site that offers profiles on nearly all the possible draft picks, similar to a site I used years ago. I think it was called Draftbook, not sure though.

Keep up the good work.

i'd like to see some player pages ala fbgs

Player page/profiles of all possible draft picks is in our plans for next year. Other than the obvious stats and scouting reports is there anything in particular you'd like to see on those pages?

you know what would be nice, some links to highlight vids, nothing like seeing a prospect in action, to consolidate some links for your users would be great

 

[nerangers]

I have enjoyed it Bloom! I am still a little confused about what the connection is going to be between this site and the NFLDraftguys site though. Eventually is all of the dynasty info you guys do over here going to just be on your site. Is it then going to become another pay site? Just Curious...

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

I have enjoyed it Bloom! I am still a little confused about what the connection is going to be between this site and the NFLDraftguys site though. Eventually is all of the dynasty info you guys do over here going to just be on your site. Is it then going to become another pay site? Just Curious...

Thanks for the kind words... to address your questions:1) Draftguys is going to be a year round site, but will mainly function as a scouting report site until January. For the most part, I will be full time over at FBG from May-December, then full time at Draftguys from January- the draft. All the FF related work remains over here (except the bloom 100 predraft), all the draft stuff goes over there. Draftguys was born because as great as this community is, and as much as we want to get our draft article straight to you guys, FBG is not the right vehicle for it. We wanted to give the hardworking IT and publishing crew here their well deserved rest.2) we have no intention of becoming a pay site, we want to exist on ad revenue alone if we can. We will reassess this if we can't pull it off on ad revenue.

 

[nerangers]

I have enjoyed it Bloom! I am still a little confused about what the connection is going to be between this site and the NFLDraftguys site though. Eventually is all of the dynasty info you guys do over here going to just be on your site. Is it then going to become another pay site? Just Curious...

Thanks for the kind words... to address your questions:1) Draftguys is going to be a year round site, but will mainly function as a scouting report site until January. For the most part, I will be full time over at FBG from May-December, then full time at Draftguys from January- the draft. All the FF related work remains over here (except the bloom 100 predraft), all the draft stuff goes over there. Draftguys was born because as great as this community is, and as much as we want to get our draft article straight to you guys, FBG is not the right vehicle for it. We wanted to give the hardworking IT and publishing crew here their well deserved rest.2) we have no intention of becoming a pay site, we want to exist on ad revenue alone if we can. We will reassess this if we can't pull it off on ad revenue.

Thanks Bloom! I don't know how you guys get it all done in the first place.

 

[Cecil Lammey]

I have enjoyed it Bloom! I am still a little confused about what the connection is going to be between this site and the NFLDraftguys site though. Eventually is all of the dynasty info you guys do over here going to just be on your site. Is it then going to become another pay site? Just Curious...

Thanks for the kind words... to address your questions:1) Draftguys is going to be a year round site, but will mainly function as a scouting report site until January. For the most part, I will be full time over at FBG from May-December, then full time at Draftguys from January- the draft. All the FF related work remains over here (except the bloom 100 predraft), all the draft stuff goes over there. Draftguys was born because as great as this community is, and as much as we want to get our draft article straight to you guys, FBG is not the right vehicle for it. We wanted to give the hardworking IT and publishing crew here their well deserved rest.2) we have no intention of becoming a pay site, we want to exist on ad revenue alone if we can. We will reassess this if we can't pull it off on ad revenue.

Thanks Bloom! I don't know how you guys get it all done in the first place.

Great staff, and great community. I LOVE the fact that Adam Schefter and Mark Schlereth are fans of the site (and FBG subscribers). I love that people are discussing (and agreeing/disagreeing) an article/mock draft/interview that we publish. Your energy fuels our energy. The response has been huge, and I look forward to everything we're going to unveil in the fall!

 

[Mister CIA]

Can you move the NFL draft date up? This Saturday works best for me.

 

[Uruk-Hai]

Just signed up for the newsletter

Looks promising guys. Many of us here are in IDP leagues, which are getting more & more popular. Are there plans to go as in-depth on defensive players as you do with those on offense?

 

[MPhilly03]

Everything I have seen so far has been excellent. I would like some different navigation/layout stuff and it sounds like that is in the works. One thing that might be good (maybe starting this year, unless you have the information from the past) would be a numerical rating for each player. That way from year to year we could compare and contrast rookie grades to slot this year rookies versus last years for example.

Otherwise, keep up the excellent work!!!

 

[Chunky Soup]

Its excellent. The only problem is its organization. There is a TON of information about each player and you have to dig to find all of it.

Say I want to read every comment about Lorenzo Booker. I need to go through each Mock. Then each RB ranking. Then each combine rept. Etc. What if you guys had player pages that linked all of the reports? (I like this idea less but ) what about a search so I could find all mentioning of Booker?

Along with that, you can have player pages link to footballguys.com. So on FBG I can search for Adrian Peterson, and I know there is some info up now, but it could link to everything on your site.

Check out rookiepedia.com. Incredible easy to navigate and get all of the combine info, etc you want. Their problem is substance and information. Your problem is organization.

though. Hope I didn't sound critical because its truly amazing so far.

 

[Chunky Soup]

1 more thing: RSS/ATOM feeds pleeeaase!!

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Just signed up for the newsletter Looks promising guys. Many of us here are in IDP leagues, which are getting more & more popular. Are there plans to go as in-depth on defensive players as you do with those on offense?

We'll be publishing defensive rankings after we get OG and C rankings up. Our new site's player pages will go just as in depth on defense as we do on offense.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Everything I have seen so far has been excellent. I would like some different navigation/layout stuff and it sounds like that is in the works. One thing that might be good (maybe starting this year, unless you have the information from the past) would be a numerical rating for each player. That way from year to year we could compare and contrast rookie grades to slot this year rookies versus last years for example. Otherwise, keep up the excellent work!!!

We will be giving the players some sort of overall grade and grades in areas of their game on the player pages we envision rolling out in the fall.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Its excellent. The only problem is its organization. There is a TON of information about each player and you have to dig to find all of it. Say I want to read every comment about Lorenzo Booker. I need to go through each Mock. Then each RB ranking. Then each combine rept. Etc. What if you guys had player pages that linked all of the reports? (I like this idea less but ) what about a search so I could find all mentioning of Booker?Along with that, you can have player pages link to footballguys.com. So on FBG I can search for Adrian Peterson, and I know there is some info up now, but it could link to everything on your site.Check out rookiepedia.com. Incredible easy to navigate and get all of the combine info, etc you want. Their problem is substance and information. Your problem is organization. though. Hope I didn't sound critical because its truly amazing so far.

We agree with this criticism and its really a byproduct of the "version .5" - the NFLDG you are looking at was done on short notice to have a decent vehicle to push content out to the audience. It was developed on a very short time frame. The "real" site will have the kind of consolidated player pages you describe.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Can you move the NFL draft date up? This Saturday works best for me.

I don't know maybe we could get BGP to dream the whole draft next week?

 

[JFT Ben]

I enjoy the site and echo some of the other's thoughts on layout streamlining. I like the tabs you have at the top, but think you could do a sub-tab to better navigate. For example, I like how Scott Wright did his tabs for rankings and how you click on, say, QB rankings you see a list and you can simply click on OT rankings to see that grouping as opposed to three ranking lists for each position. Maybe you could still do that but in a table format.

Also, I'd like to see who I should keep an eye on in the college game in 2007. A "future prospect" section showing potential 2008 draftees (both underclassmen that may declare and top seniors).

..and one last thing. I'm not sure your goals of this site, but I think pimping yourself (and probably getting paid) to local radio stations nationwide to talk draft from a national perspective around this time of year is money. Our local radio station in Madison has Scott Wright on every few weeks around this time to pontificate on the draft. I'd imagine post-draft grades and discussion would also follow if you chose this avenue. Not sure how to go about doing this, but I know other sites/draft experts get air time but don't know if that's what you're looking to do.

Anyways, thanks for another great site to waste time at.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

I enjoy the site and echo some of the other's thoughts on layout streamlining. I like the tabs you have at the top, but think you could do a sub-tab to better navigate. For example, I like how Scott Wright did his tabs for rankings and how you click on, say, QB rankings you see a list and you can simply click on OT rankings to see that grouping as opposed to three ranking lists for each position. Maybe you could still do that but in a table format. Also, I'd like to see who I should keep an eye on in the college game in 2007. A "future prospect" section showing potential 2008 draftees (both underclassmen that may declare and top seniors). ..and one last thing. I'm not sure your goals of this site, but I think pimping yourself (and probably getting paid) to local radio stations nationwide to talk draft from a national perspective around this time of year is money. Our local radio station in Madison has Scott Wright on every few weeks around this time to pontificate on the draft. I'd imagine post-draft grades and discussion would also follow if you chose this avenue. Not sure how to go about doing this, but I know other sites/draft experts get air time but don't know if that's what you're looking to do.Anyways, thanks for another great site to waste time at.

Thanks for the feedback1) you will definitely be able to just go straight to a position much easier at our new site2) We are starting to cover the 08 class. We are going to publish josh buchanan's top 100 class of 08 small school guys and we've already interviewed two of the top players on the list who you will be hearing a lot about: Josh Johnson, QB, San Diego and Tony LeZotte, FS, James Madison. These should hit iTunes next week.3) Radio Gigs are something we've done and want to step up, but we have not had the time to promote ourselves to them this year. I am going to do some spots in Austin, and the whole crew does spots in Iowa. We'll be publicizing what spots do we on the site. Next year we will be hitting this HARD.

 

[Marc Faletti]

Hi everyone!

This is great feedback. We really appreciate you all taking the time to shareyour thoughts on how we can improve.

The next version of the site will be database-driven, meaning our content will be infinitely more searchable and organizable than it is now. Your feedback here will really help us use that database effectively to get you info the way you need it.

Our version now doesn't have nearly the flexibility and power our next site will, but we just couldn't wait to talk draft.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

If you ever need someone to write something funny, let me know.

 

[Andy Dufresne]

If you ever need someone to write something funny, let me know.

You might know a guy?

 

[BLOX]

I love the site and the info. I've always been ok in my dynasty rookie drafts in the first or second round, but with my newfound info I think I will be able to find a couple of guys who may end up contributing to my teams eventually.

The one thing I think that would add to your site would be a primetime player watch during the college season. Meaning, if a prospect we may want to take a look at (or should take a look at) is playing in a game that weekend we would know to watch and see how that player is in live action.

Does this make sense. It may be too much with all the talent out there now, but it was just an idea off the top of my head.

Thanks for the hard work, keep it up.

 

[Evilgrin 72]

If you ever need someone to write something funny, let me know.

You might know a guy?

:finger:Bloom put my mock up there. Proud to be associated with this venture in any way.

 

[Marc Faletti]

I love the site and the info. I've always been ok in my dynasty rookie drafts in the first or second round, but with my newfound info I think I will be able to find a couple of guys who may end up contributing to my teams eventually.The one thing I think that would add to your site would be a primetime player watch during the college season. Meaning, if a prospect we may want to take a look at (or should take a look at) is playing in a game that weekend we would know to watch and see how that player is in live action.Does this make sense. It may be too much with all the talent out there now, but it was just an idea off the top of my head.Thanks for the hard work, keep it up.

Great point, Blox. We hope to include that in our weekly email, especially when two very good players are matched up against each other. For example, when Chris Houston and Sidney Rice were facing off, I wish someone had reminded ME to watch that game, so hopefully we can bring that to others...

 

[FTRWRTR]

I don't know if you guys can do this but I like hearing/reading what a player's teammates and former coaches have to say about him. They may be biased but I think they can tell you more things about a guy's character, work ethic, etc than he or his agent will.

Also in each player's analysis I'd like to read your fantasy outlook on him

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

I love the site and the info. I've always been ok in my dynasty rookie drafts in the first or second round, but with my newfound info I think I will be able to find a couple of guys who may end up contributing to my teams eventually.The one thing I think that would add to your site would be a primetime player watch during the college season. Meaning, if a prospect we may want to take a look at (or should take a look at) is playing in a game that weekend we would know to watch and see how that player is in live action.Does this make sense. It may be too much with all the talent out there now, but it was just an idea off the top of my head.Thanks for the hard work, keep it up.

Great point, Blox. We hope to include that in our weekly email, especially when two very good players are matched up against each other. For example, when Chris Houston and Sidney Rice were facing off, I wish someone had reminded ME to watch that game, so hopefully we can bring that to others...

Just to expand on what Faletti said - The "viewers guide" to this weekend in college football is what we imagine the main use of the newsletter to be - so its great to hear that that is something that would interest you.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

I don't know if you guys can do this but I like hearing/reading what a player's teammates and former coaches have to say about him. They may be biased but I think they can tell you more things about a guy's character, work ethic, etc than he or his agent will.Also in each player's analysis I'd like to read your fantasy outlook on him

We talk to coaches, and people that talk to coaches - the positive stuff is easy to publish, the negative stuff is more confidential and stuff we would have to put out unsourced. Still, we plan on having contacts at just about every school for such things."fantasy outlook" is a planned section of our player pages, glad to hear you would like it.

 

[BlackHole]

Please make sure your future partners do not get our email address'. I'm sure this is covered, but thought I'd throw it out there just in case. I don't want to use one of their links or information tools and automatically/unwittingly be signed up for their address book. If they want address, please ask them to make it very clear they are asking to have them.

TIA

Need to add, Joe and the crew are the best out there bar none, and I appreciate what the site has evolved into and helped me evolve my FF skills/ability into.

 

[renesauz]

Great work guys! Other then streamlining the navigation, I can't see anything really worng with it.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

First- great job.

Here are some of my pet peeves- unless you are looking at coaches film, you aren't really breaking down game tape, you are looking at games or highlights. You do a great job (watching games, going to practices, seeing players live, attending the combine), but don't paraphrase to make it sound like you are doing something you are not.

I love how well construx boy describes what he sees- but to take this to the next level you need to either get Waldman on board regularly (his podcast was great) or do something similar. Break down whole games- including blocking. Rookie RB's that can pass protect and recognize blitzes get to play third downs- that is a huge factor in FF success. TE's and to a lesser degree wr's need to run block and adjust routes. Highlights are fun to watch, but in my opinion, often lead to lisguided oopinions about players.

Also, I would try to get some affiliates in cities/college towns for pro days or simply link to Murphy or NFL.com.

THat part of the site to me feels a little contrived where you say you "report on the pro days" but you- more often than not- are not.

I think what you are doing is fantastic, and I read it daily. You have a tremendous amount of insightful features and great depth. You don't need to go over the top with slight hyperbole- what you do is off the charts.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

First- great job.Here are some of my pet peeves- unless you are looking at coaches film, you aren't really breaking down game tape, you are looking at games or highlights. You do a great job (watching games, going to practices, seeing players live, attending the combine), but don't paraphrase to make it sound like you are doing something you are not.

Point taken, and I'll be mindful of it in the future.

I love how well construx boy describes what he sees- but to take this to the next level you need to either get Waldman on board regularly (his podcast was great) or do something similar. Break down whole games- including blocking. Rookie RB's that can pass protect and recognize blitzes get to play third downs- that is a huge factor in FF success. TE's and to a lesser degree wr's need to run block and adjust routes. Highlights are fun to watch, but in my opinion, often lead to lisguided oopinions about players.Also, I would try to get some affiliates in cities/college towns for pro days or simply link to Murphy or NFL.com.THat part of the site to me feels a little contrived where you say you "report on the pro days" but you- more often than not- are not.

Waldman is coming on board, and the site we roll out in the fall will be focus on scouting reports from individual games, and we will be recruiting homers to contribute on behalf of the teams they're passionate about. Expect a casting call before the season.we will be employing those homers in hopefully getting credentialled for pro days. Point taken on the nature of the pro day articles - we'll try to be clearer on that in the future.

I think what you are doing is fantastic, and I read it daily. You have a tremendous amount of insightful features and great depth. You don't need to go over the top with slight hyperbole- what you do is off the charts.

thanks for the thoughtful and honest feedback, its invaluable.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

While I am nitpicking, I have a request/suggestion. I sincerely think you can become the new dratnik standard. You have some great minds, great eyes and good writing. There is a script/format that almost all draft/prospect guides follow: lots of fragments, draft speak (Gets good punch, has great leg drive, etc). Also, when doing mock drafts, people use the same 2-3 line blurb format.

I would encourage you to go beyond this, create a new standard, and leave the other sites in the dust. When you do use the draft speak (has great leg drive) use specific examples- as evidenced in his 3 tackle breaking 8yd TD run against Clemson. Then people will know that this is evidence from your eyes, and not just a follow the leader rehash (I know you don't do this, but sometimes your writing could be more specific.)

Again, I am not trying to be overly critical- I just think this site can be the very best, and this would be a giant step in that direction.

 

[prymetyme25]

While I am nitpicking, I have a request/suggestion. I sincerely think you can become the new dratnik standard. You have some great minds, great eyes and good writing. There is a script/format that almost all draft/prospect guides follow: lots of fragments, draft speak (Gets good punch, has great leg drive, etc). Also, when doing mock drafts, people use the same 2-3 line blurb format. I would encourage you to go beyond this, create a new standard, and leave the other sites in the dust. When you do use the draft speak (has great leg drive) use specific examples- as evidenced in his 3 tackle breaking 8yd TD run against Clemson. Then people will know that this is evidence from your eyes, and not just a follow the leader rehash (I know you don't do this, but sometimes your writing could be more specific.)Again, I am not trying to be overly critical- I just think this site can be the very best, and this would be a giant step in that direction.

I agree with this. But me being a draft junkie I'd love to be able to do what you guy do great work. I noticed that guys are rising and falling on your list but no explanation of why. (pet peave as alot of sites do this.)All and all that site is like a dream come true.

 

[rabidfireweasel]

Also-

Thanks for being so thoughtful and able to listen to criticism. You have not been the least bit defensive. That is no easy task, and I believe, will go a long way towards making your site a tremendous success.

 

[Cecil Lammey]

The feedback is very much appreciated, after all, we made this site for you!

 

[pgreenfan]

I think the website has the potential to be one of the industry leaders. I am honestly amazed at the quality of work being put out around here, these aren't just articles recited and butchered opinions. The fact that Bloom and the entire team work like scouts is amazing.

 

[ConstruxBoy]

While I am nitpicking, I have a request/suggestion. I sincerely think you can become the new dratnik standard. You have some great minds, great eyes and good writing. There is a script/format that almost all draft/prospect guides follow: lots of fragments, draft speak (Gets good punch, has great leg drive, etc). Also, when doing mock drafts, people use the same 2-3 line blurb format. I would encourage you to go beyond this, create a new standard, and leave the other sites in the dust. When you do use the draft speak (has great leg drive) use specific examples- as evidenced in his 3 tackle breaking 8yd TD run against Clemson. Then people will know that this is evidence from your eyes, and not just a follow the leader rehash (I know you don't do this, but sometimes your writing could be more specific.)Again, I am not trying to be overly critical- I just think this site can be the very best, and this would be a giant step in that direction.

Some great ideas and thanks for the nice comments. Agree completely that highlight films aren't the best vehicle for "breaking down the tape", but it's nice to use something that everyone can access. And there still are some insights you can gain by looking at a 3-4 minute highlight tape. Regarding the draft speak, I agree with what you are saying. It's funny because I'm doing a 4:39 clip of Brandon Jackson and it's got a ton of short clips and I'm really trying to switch up what I'm saying instead of repeating the same thing 20 times. But it's difficult to do. One of the things I personally try to pay attention to when looking at RBs is their ability to run in tight spaces. I think that some people also call it wiggle. But it is almost always the case that a running back will have much less open space in the NFL than they had in college. Paying attention to how well they get through that tight space, spin moves, turn their shoulders, turn their hips, and how they position themselves in that tight space, lower the pad level, protect the ball, is a real good indicator of how well they'll adjust to the pro game in my opinion. I'll try to work that information into my articles with more frequency. Thanks again for the comments. And I'm excited to hear that Waldman is coming aboard. Love his stuff!

 

[msommer]

Can you move the NFL draft date up? This Saturday works best for me.

I don't know maybe we could get BGP to dream the whole draft next week?

Just don't get him riled up if it fails - he'll want to shut it down then

 

[el centro]

I don't get to listen to the podcasts very often, but you're interview with Russ Lande on 4/7 was outstanding! Any chance you can get him as a weekly guest? Maybe even a paid guest?!?!? He'd be well worth it... unreal knowledge, and I'm anxious to get TSN's draft guide now! Being from Wisconsin - I'm anxious to read up on the kid from UW-Whitewater he mentioned.

Many thanks for this fantastic site Bloom, and staff... keep up the good work.

 

[msommer]

Just signed up for the newsletter Looks promising guys. Many of us here are in IDP leagues, which are getting more & more popular. Are there plans to go as in-depth on defensive players as you do with those on offense?

We'll be publishing defensive rankings after we get OG and C rankings up. Our new site's player pages will go just as in depth on defense as we do on offense.

I have one small issue with the Bloom 100 and IDPs. I know this is difficult, but as someone that operate in several leagues with high emphasis on IDPs (or perhaps a better phrase is balance between O and D scoring) I really have to trawl the 100 to find D prospects. An example is in the 51-60 section - I can pretty much assure you (on basis of pre-draft information) that Reggie Nelson will not last to the fourth round in any of my leagues whereas DeShawn Wynn stands little to no chance of being drafted at all. It is my impression that we have wildly differing perceptions of the scoring systems used and the importance of IDPs. Maybe some effort should be spent on charting the importance of IDPs in IDP leagues - I suppose something could be done with MFL. The alternative is that the IDPs are being de-emphasized and I doubt that to be the case.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

I don't get to listen to the podcasts very often, but you're interview with Russ Lande on 4/7 was outstanding! Any chance you can get him as a weekly guest? Maybe even a paid guest?!?!? He'd be well worth it... unreal knowledge, and I'm anxious to get TSN's draft guide now! Being from Wisconsin - I'm anxious to read up on the kid from UW-Whitewater he mentioned.Many thanks for this fantastic site Bloom, and staff... keep up the good work.

Russ is a friend of the site and show and he will definitely be on again when time allows.

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Just signed up for the newsletter Looks promising guys. Many of us here are in IDP leagues, which are getting more & more popular. Are there plans to go as in-depth on defensive players as you do with those on offense?

We'll be publishing defensive rankings after we get OG and C rankings up. Our new site's player pages will go just as in depth on defense as we do on offense.

I have one small issue with the Bloom 100 and IDPs. I know this is difficult, but as someone that operate in several leagues with high emphasis on IDPs (or perhaps a better phrase is balance between O and D scoring) I really have to trawl the 100 to find D prospects. An example is in the 51-60 section - I can pretty much assure you (on basis of pre-draft information) that Reggie Nelson will not last to the fourth round in any of my leagues whereas DeShawn Wynn stands little to no chance of being drafted at all. It is my impression that we have wildly differing perceptions of the scoring systems used and the importance of IDPs. Maybe some effort should be spent on charting the importance of IDPs in IDP leagues - I suppose something could be done with MFL. The alternative is that the IDPs are being de-emphasized and I doubt that to be the case.

msommer,Actually I do de-emphasize IDPs. Ill be writing my opus on deep IDP dynasty league strategy over the summer, and this will get explained in full detail, but the basic idea is that reasonably startable guys at IDP positions tend to be on the WW if you do your homework, whereas offensive players are hard to find. lets look at Wynn vs. Nelson. If you draft Wynn, you can drop him at any time and pick up a safety who has a chance to be almost as productive as Nelson. Nelson's deep range is so good that a team would be foolish to draft him and keep him in the box. The guy is just not going to have more than 60 or so tackles in a year, I dont see it. Sure, he may have an INT 5 or 6 times, but those are going to be his only startable weeks. Meanwhile, I guarantee you there are at least 5-10 safeties on your WW right now who will have IDP numbers as good as Nelson, and thats projecting Nelson to start all year. Wynn, on the other hand, may get a chance to win part of a job in training camp. If he actually gets some touches, or even becomes a primary backup, you'll definitely want to keep him. If he's a turd in camp, you can drop him and pick up a safety who will be almost as productive as Nelson. If you decide to drop Nelson because you picked up this year's Chris Hope, I doubt you'll find an RB as talented as Wynn on WW. Long story short, I see Nelson as at least a 50/50 shot at becoming a bye week/injury safety and say, 20% shot at being a startable fantasy safety. I see Wynn as a 5% shot being a relevant RB. I think the commodity that Wynn represents is worth more, unless your scoring system is heavily tilted towards IDPs.But hey, the fun of deep IDP dynasty leagues is that there's a million ways from point A to point B, we all have our unique way of playing GM. Nelson could surprise and have an Ed Reed like year. Wynn could be cut before camp is over.

 

[Dope]

Could the bloom 100 be one document?

Even a current version being 1-60 would be awesome.

(Unless the 10 per page is a revenue driven decision...then I understand.)

 

[Sigmund Bloom]

Could the bloom 100 be one document?Even a current version being 1-60 would be awesome.(Unless the 10 per page is a revenue driven decision...then I understand.)

dsrm,thats a great idea. Sometimes the most obvious idea does not occur to me. Ill make a one document bloom 100 (1-60 for now) to date ASAP. The decision to release them 10 a time was more because I just dont have the time to dedicate to doing a complete 100 review all at once, but I didnt want to sit on everything until I finished it.

 

[msommer]

Just signed up for the newsletter Looks promising guys. Many of us here are in IDP leagues, which are getting more & more popular. Are there plans to go as in-depth on defensive players as you do with those on offense?

We'll be publishing defensive rankings after we get OG and C rankings up. Our new site's player pages will go just as in depth on defense as we do on offense.

I have one small issue with the Bloom 100 and IDPs. I know this is difficult, but as someone that operate in several leagues with high emphasis on IDPs (or perhaps a better phrase is balance between O and D scoring) I really have to trawl the 100 to find D prospects. An example is in the 51-60 section - I can pretty much assure you (on basis of pre-draft information) that Reggie Nelson will not last to the fourth round in any of my leagues whereas DeShawn Wynn stands little to no chance of being drafted at all. It is my impression that we have wildly differing perceptions of the scoring systems used and the importance of IDPs. Maybe some effort should be spent on charting the importance of IDPs in IDP leagues - I suppose something could be done with MFL. The alternative is that the IDPs are being de-emphasized and I doubt that to be the case.

msommer,Actually I do de-emphasize IDPs. Ill be writing my opus on deep IDP dynasty league strategy over the summer, and this will get explained in full detail, but the basic idea is that reasonably startable guys at IDP positions tend to be on the WW if you do your homework, whereas offensive players are hard to find. lets look at Wynn vs. Nelson. If you draft Wynn, you can drop him at any time and pick up a safety who has a chance to be almost as productive as Nelson. Nelson's deep range is so good that a team would be foolish to draft him and keep him in the box. The guy is just not going to have more than 60 or so tackles in a year, I dont see it. Sure, he may have an INT 5 or 6 times, but those are going to be his only startable weeks. Meanwhile, I guarantee you there are at least 5-10 safeties on your WW right now who will have IDP numbers as good as Nelson, and thats projecting Nelson to start all year. Wynn, on the other hand, may get a chance to win part of a job in training camp. If he actually gets some touches, or even becomes a primary backup, you'll definitely want to keep him. If he's a turd in camp, you can drop him and pick up a safety who will be almost as productive as Nelson. If you decide to drop Nelson because you picked up this year's Chris Hope, I doubt you'll find an RB as talented as Wynn on WW. Long story short, I see Nelson as at least a 50/50 shot at becoming a bye week/injury safety and say, 20% shot at being a startable fantasy safety. I see Wynn as a 5% shot being a relevant RB. I think the commodity that Wynn represents is worth more, unless your scoring system is heavily tilted towards IDPs.But hey, the fun of deep IDP dynasty leagues is that there's a million ways from point A to point B, we all have our unique way of playing GM. Nelson could surprise and have an Ed Reed like year. Wynn could be cut before camp is over.

Without going into specifics - Chris Hope was not a WW pick up last year. He was auctioned off in April (to me ). Point being that when the balance is there the WW can be equally as bare for IDPs as it is for RBs.Maybe it is only in the admittedly few leagues I participate in that we strive for balance.

 

[QUEZILLA]

Could you all put the dates the podcast were released if you don't already. I linked through joes email, and was having trouble remembering the last one I listened to.

 

[waiver wire]

not sure if this is being done

but past and current draft grades and workout/combine numbers

 

[ConstruxBoy]

not sure if this is being done but past and current draft grades and workout/combine numbers

I think that's something that will be done going forward for this site, but I believe you run into some legal issues if you start publishing the last 3 years of Kiper's rankings or whatever.