Instead of yammering on about it, why don't you read the 700+ page RSP that several people have mentioned.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Post Draft 100? (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter domvin
- Start date
Cassius
Footballguy
It wasn't written by a scout.
PranksterJD
Footballguy
Waldman sticks to his guns. He has for years. He did the same thing by ranking Darren McFadden low, and by ranking Cedric Peerman high. For whatever reason, he's very polarized by certain players. Sometimes he's dead on, sometimes he's off his rocker. Either way, the RSP certainly gives all the information necessary to find out whether you agree or not.
Mr. Peterson
Footballguy
Because even though I have some free time to check out rankings that I pay for, I don't have time to read a 700+ page report. The rest of my life is a little too busy for that. All I'm asking is for an explanation why his rankings are so different.
Last edited by a moderator:
Mr. Peterson
Footballguy
And do you realize you're getting all bent out of shape because I simply asked why he had the top RB selected in this draft ranked so low? That's all I was doing. It's not wrong for me to question one of the "expert rankings" that are part of being a member on this site. But you got pissy instead and decided to start something in this thread.It wasn't written by a scout.
lyon812
Footballguy
Just to jump in here in an attempt to be helpful:1. The report is 700+ pages, but you don't have to read all of it. Matt provides a number of synopses for each position that are easily read and digested, and provide a wealth of explanation and information. I usually print these 25-30 pages out. A vast majority of the pages are his actual scouting reports for each player, which are there to provide depth and background, but are easily skippable if you're just looking for the conclusions/projections/analysis. 25-30 pages can be read while taking several craps over the course of several days, if you're concerned about time. 2. You have to remember that NFL scouts draft players they think will help their NFL teams in some way. This is not the same as fantasy players, who draft players they think will help their fantasy team in some way. NFL goals/desires != fantasy goals/desires. 3. Spiller has been one of the more polarizing backs in this draft. A lot boils down to where you see him on the continuum of Chris Johnson and Reggie Bush. A lot of people see him much further on the Bush end, which means while he has value to his NFL team and is an exciting, dynamic player, that he'll be a replaceable talent in terms of fantasy teams. A lot of people see him much more towards the CJ end, which means he's a future every-down back who can take it to the house on any carry. Moreover, a lot of people think his situation is less than desirable, that Buffalo will plan to use him and Lynch/Jackson, that the team and late-season weather are detrimental to his numbers, and that early Bills comments about using him as a non-featured back are going to be found true. 4. Because of this polarization, there's been a fair amount of discussion--or rather, both sides dismissing the other because they're certain they're right--and sometimes, people get upset when they're asked to summarize months of discussion for others. Their attitude is "What a silly question, haven't you been paying attention for the last several months?" Just ignore them.
cstu
Footballguy
Where at?
cstu
Footballguy
It's a great report. You should read it.
Mr. Peterson
Footballguy
I'll take a look. Thanks.It's a great report. You should read it.
Matt Waldman
Footballguy
Sounds like my wife talking about me.
Cassius
Footballguy
Yes, clearly you do not have enough free time to devote to this issue.
hes a lot lower in my PPR rankings. nonPPR, its much harder to get excited about the TEs and second tier WRs.
Honda
Footballguy
Wow. No love for LaFell. Talent, situation, or both?
both - #2 possession WR type in a run-first offense. not a playmaker, not a special WR in the air or after the catch, just a solid guy at best
I love Matt's work. The only real problem I have with it is that his analyses is usually based on a thorough breakdown of a single game. When you rely almost exclusively on your own work, AND your analyses is generally limited to a single game, the chances of outlier rankings are dramatically increased. Everyone has good or bad games, so a player having an exceptionally bad game can drive his score down.
With that in mind, Waldman's rankings are among the best around, but I take his significant outliers with a grain of salt. I'm more interested in who Matt is high on then who he is (unusually) low on.
With that in mind, Waldman's rankings are among the best around, but I take his significant outliers with a grain of salt. I'm more interested in who Matt is high on then who he is (unusually) low on.
smashingsilver
Footballguy
I had the same problem with his research, so I asked him about it. He gave a decent response. First of all, there's just not enough time to scout multiple games for every player. More importantly, however, is that he tempers his reactions to exceptionally good or bad performances if he only has one game to work from. Also, Matt gets to see everyone at the Shrine/Senior/T vs. N games again, so while there may not be a specific scouting report for those events, they do help provide additional info. I'm not part of the Matt fanboy club, but I do appreciate the work involved and the quality of analysis for what he does see. Even if I don't agree with his opinion, it does help temper my personal analysis in some cases, which is usually a good thing.
bonesman
Footballguy
cstu
Footballguy
Ok, I see your point there, although I do think he should be after Tate and Gerhart at the very least. The track record for 6th round picks is not good and usually when they've done well they slipped because they were injured or came from a small school. The only thing reason I think it might work out for Dwyer is that he's the youngest RB in the league now (turns 21 in July) and it gives him time to mature and adjust to the NFL.Sigmund Bloom said:
Last edited by a moderator:
Tick
Footballguy
I tend to treat all draft ratings the same way... I want to see why a player is ranked higher than usual. I remember Waldman raving over MJD. You can make a lot of bad Peerman/Dixon picks and not lose enough value to make up for the value you gained if you got MJD in the late first or early second based on Waldman's rankings.
healthpellets
Footballguy
i'm confused on this whole Waldman thing. especially in reference to Peerman. he had Peerman in the top 3, but there was no reason to take him in the first two rounds. hell, even the first three. i took him at 4.2 and he's been sitting on my bench, rotating NFL teams, since then. maybe he pays off one day, maybe he doesn't. but i risked so little, it doesn't much matter.
as for spiller...use your eyes and the information you have. if the rankings you see don't make sense, then ignore them.
as for spiller...use your eyes and the information you have. if the rankings you see don't make sense, then ignore them.
At the time I did my rookie rankings, we were inserting rookie names into the database. Tate was one that was not added yet and McCluster was not listed in the WRs. Everything has been added/changed now and my rankings are up to date. Now just looking to add some comments.
Last edited by a moderator:
