Projections really bother me...and they're wrong! (1 Viewer)

[Ministry of Pain]

Every year for the past 5 years I have tried to scream from every available bullhorn, in every preseason ranking thread I start, in every possible way I know of I have tried to voice my displeasure with the entire projection system that permeates these boards. I even see websites out their boasting about how great they were at the projections. I would really have to see what their summer projections were and what they ended with to see how some of these sites are scoring 100. I do not believe for a second that they got all the stats right down to the yds and TD for all the players. It is impossible.

There are so many holes in the FBG projections, and I'm not picking on them but I pay for a membership every year and this is where I do the majority of my bantering so I'll use them as an example. For instance, Warrick Dunn had his worst year as a RB last year playing on a sinking ship team in the Atlanta Flacons and he still finished 30th. He has been between 15-24 for most of his career. A very undervalued RB2 for the past 10 years in this league.

I'll take this a step further...when he was in TB he had reception totals of 44, 68, 44, 54 and then 50 his 1st season in Atlanta...then I don't know if it was Vick, the HC Mora, or what happened but he became invisible in the passing department where his totals slipped under 30 a year. Now he signs a $3 million deal with the Bucs who did not sign him to simply watch him walk around the sidelines as some websites suggest I assure you. What will his totals be? I haven't the foggiest of clues but I do know that I would bet money he finishes well ahead of the ranking he has at 45 this year, and likely will far outperform his draft spot of somewhere in the 12th round or later. I can't put everything I am talking about into his stats but I do think thru some cognitive thinking that one should easily derive that Dunn = value this year, tons of it I might add. What track record does Earnest Graham bring to the table? Dunn could easily find himself getting 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches a game quite a bit this season.

So let's land the plane a bit and focus on what I am talking about becasue this deserves some serious debate. I understand it is easy to project out for guys like LT, TO, and the like because they are so GD consistent you can't be off by more than 10% one way or the other, fantastic. But then I see people just loading in Roddy White's stats from a year ago and I want to scream WTF are you thinking? Projections are very dangerous to put on players that have no track record or history to really go on. And if you think the same top20 at WR last season is going to be the same top20 WR this season, you are delusional and you are going to miss the playoffs this season because you won't get your head out of your you know what. Think people, think!

Put the stats down and try and think logically about what you are going to do on draft day. What do you do, you say? Let me try and steer you into some different thinking. Get a firm grip on the OL for all 32 teams, rank em, file em, put em down on paper. Use all resources you can to determine strength on these very important pieces of the puzzle. Don't fall for what everyone is writing if it goes against what you believe. For example, I am not sold on the Bucs and Raiders OL the way others seem to be. I could be way off but I am not ready to say these OL are good-great just yet.

Next you need to seriously think about the coaching staff and what/whether they like to run/pass. Offensive Philosophy is so critical. There is actually 2 people running the OC position in Detroit...did you know that? Has this ever worked before? And they have come out and said flat out they are not going to pass the way Martz did...they are sending out the "Conservative Approach" if you listen to anything they have to say. What does that do to Roy Williams who some in here think is bound for 1,300 yds and 10 TD...what about Calvin Johnson and his progression in year 2? I don't have all the answers but these are the things you need to think about. Not just crunching out Roy Williams numbers if and when he plays a full 16 games.

So you got the OL, coaching philosophy down, next I would look at surrounding talent in the skill positions especially QB. Next I would look at the schedule and see if you can find a soft schedule and also who has the harder schedules as it will matter. And finally I might look at the intangibles. LT for example simply has intangibles that work in his favor. He could have no OL, QB, a pass happy OC, and a tough schedule, he would still finish top5...you catch what I'm saying here?

Then I would take these categories...and you can make up others but I try to limit it to around 5, then divide up the 5 categories and give them different weighted averages, sort of like the grades you got in school. Then I look and see what I have, put them into tiers based on what I uncover with a nonprojection system, then I figure out where I have to draft which player in order to get who I want.

I'll hang up and listen.

 

[MCguidance]

MoP, I like what you are saying and I think it has tremendous merit. However, I look at projections much like the SATs, they are not a great indicator of what to expect, but a necessary bar from which to draw comparisons. Moreover, it's hard for me to put any stock into projections unless there is an explanation as to why such numbers are reached. I am more concerned with the logic leading up to the projections rather than the actual projections.

Oh, and I thoroughly enjoyed your rant.

 

[RageRhino]

What are your Tiers then?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

MoP, I like what you are saying and I think it has tremendous merit. However, I look at projections much like the SATs, they are not a great indicator of what to expect, but a necessary bar from which to draw comparisons. Moreover, it's hard for me to put any stock into projections unless there is an explanation as to why such numbers are reached. I am more concerned with the logic leading up to the projections rather than the actual projections. Oh, and I thoroughly enjoyed your rant.

Thank youI believe projections can have merit too if they are accompanied by a thorough write up, but I feel the logic behind the pick is much more important. Stats and points are simply a by product of the things we are discussing in the analysis of the players.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

What are your Tiers then?

Great question...let's assume LT, ADP, SJax, and Addai all score out as an "A" overall. Those 4 RB would make up my 1st tier and one could assume that even if I had the #4 pick that I would be happy to get whoever picked 1-3 did not take. Now that is not actually how I see those 4 RB but it's a small example fo what I am talking about.

 

[Dinsy Ejotuz]

Agree 100% MOP. The best you can do is to create a range of values and get some sense of whether the player is more likely to be near the middle of that range, or more likely to be on the extremes.

I think everyone does this mentally when they're projecting, but presenting a single number without including a min and max and an estimated risk factor (upside too) isn't very useful IMO.

 

[Kruppe]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

So you are saying we have to form our projections based on:

1. OL

2. Coaching philosophy

3. Surrounding talent

4. Schedule

5. Intangibles

What about:

1. Last years performance

2. Career performance

3. Injury history (maybe include drug/crime history here)

4. Job security

 

[slayer666]

There are so many holes in the FBG projections, and I'm not picking on them but I pay for a membership every year and this is where I do the majority of my bantering so I'll use them as an example. For instance, Warrick Dunn had his worst year as a RB last year playing on a sinking ship team in the Atlanta Flacons and he still finished 30th. He has been between 15-24 for most of his career. A very undervalued RB2 for the past 10 years in this league. I'll take this a step further...when he was in TB he had reception totals of 44, 68, 44, 54 and then 50 his 1st season in Atlanta...then I don't know if it was Vick, the HC Mora, or what happened but he became invisible in the passing department where his totals slipped under 30 a year. Now he signs a $3 million deal with the Bucs who did not sign him to simply watch him walk around the sidelines as some websites suggest I assure you. What will his totals be? I haven't the foggiest of clues but I do know that I would bet money he finishes well ahead of the ranking he has at 45 this year, and likely will far outperform his draft spot of somewhere in the 12th round or later. I can't put everything I am talking about into his stats but I do think thru some cognitive thinking that one should easily derive that Dunn = value this year, tons of it I might add. What track record does Earnest Graham bring to the table? Dunn could easily find himself getting 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches a game quite a bit this season.

Dunn is 33 and approaching 3,000 touches. His YPCA has fallen off in each of the past three years (1.1 yards from '05 to '06 and another .8 yards from '06 to '07).

 

[DoubleG]

MoP - your point is a solid one, although your examples are little weak - and therein lies the tricky part about projections. You seem to think that Dunn gets 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches per game. There are many that would argue that it could be 5-8 catches and 1-2 catches as an average, especially if the Bucs try to bring back Caddy later in the year and work him in too.

Roddy White is another enigma. He had a good year last year. Was it becuase he's finally becoming a good NFL WR? Is it because Atlanta identified him as the #1 WR? Or was it becuase he was the favorite of Harrington/Insurance Salesman/Lefty? Many think it's reasons one and two and that a bad Atlanta team will have to throw alot, so his stats will remain about the same. Some think Atlanta's new QB might be even better than the patchwork rotation they had last year by the end of the season and that the improved offensive line might stabilize the offense, making his stats...well, about the same as last year.

 

[Jason Wood]

MOP -- Not sure of the gripe.

1) The projections that we provide on the site aren't based purely on the numbers, and you know that. David, Bob, Chris, Maurile and I spend exhaustive amounts of time looking at the fundamental picture from every angle we can and then synthesize that into projections. Doesn't mean we always get them right (predicting football performance is HARD) or that we don't need people to elicit debate about them (e.g., the Dunn argument you just brought up), but it's not like we spew them out from a black box either.

2) Not every subscriber wants the same things. Some just want rankings. They could care less what thought went into the rankings, they want to look at the final, distilled version of all the behind-the-scenes work and be told who we think will perform and at what round we would draft them. Other subscribers want every piece of statistical minutiae they can find. It's not enough to see our projections but they want to make sure our projections are adjusted for strength of schedule, correlate to league historical means, etc..

What I'm most proud of regarding our site, and why I think we've managed to make FBG into the best source of fantasy information and tools on the 'net is that we facilitate ANY TYPE OF OWNER.

*** 5 sets of projections, full customizable for those guys who ARE into the stats hard and heavy

*** Hundreds of cheatsheets for the guys who who just want to be told who to draft based on their scoring system

*** Face offs which are PURELY fundamental, textual debates that give almost no consideration to statistical projections

*** Under/Over value analysis which, again, isn't about the numbers but looks at ADP and the situations at hand

*** Spotlights which are detailed discussions of the fundamental pros and cons of each player and how that plays into expectations

*** Customizable rankings from more than 20 staff [and you can exclude/include whoever you like]

And that's to say nothing of all the articles, the Dominator, etc...

If you think projections are worthless, don't look at them. Don't worry about them. Leverage the hundreds of other pieces of content on the site that are laser focused on situations as you espouse. On the other hand, recognize that a LOT of owners do care about projections, and we're doing our best to serve every constituency well.

 

[Michael Fox Fan]

Agree 100% MOP. The best you can do is to create a range of values and get some sense of whether the player is more likely to be near the middle of that range, or more likely to be on the extremes. I think everyone does this mentally when they're projecting, but presenting a single number without including a min and max and an estimated risk factor (upside too) isn't very useful IMO.

Ok, so given that I was trained as an actuary, I completely understand why a range is preferable to a point estimate. But much like my clients demand that I put a stake in the ground - and actually pick a point estimate - I also *get* why projections are important.So while MOP is bringing up great points, it's a bit silly to frame this as "projections are bad, discussion and thought process is good."How can you have great projections without doing the heavy lifting MOP describes? Short answer: you can't.You can, however, very easily throw out a set of numbers. Which I think is what MOP is complaining about.Anyway, good discussion.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

So you are saying we have to form our projections based on:

1. OL

2. Coaching philosophy

3. Surrounding talent

4. Schedule

5. Intangibles

What about:

1. Last years performance...VERY DANGEROUS

2. Career performance...can also get you in trouble

3. Injury history (maybe include drug/crime history here)...intangibles-good

4. Job security...I would class this as Opp/Coach Philsophy, and intangibles

I am not projecting stats, there is a major difference IMO.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

While I get no value out of projections without reasoning, to me, the language of FF are statistics. It's what we understand and how we translate the success/failure of our respective teams.

As such, while just posting a projection does little for me, just posting logic and reason does little for me too because without a frame of reference, you are not disclosing your interpretation of success/failure so that I can compare it against mine.

 

[David Yudkin]

Remember that looking at the projections is really looking into the eyes of Dodds unless you look at all 5 guys making the projections. And not all staff make projections, so the rant is somewhat misleading.

Averaging the five staff projections would give Dunn 115-439-3 with 27-200-1 for an average fantasy point total of 83 points (which last year would have ranked him 48th).

He's 33 years old and had a 3.1 ypc last year. Call me crazy, but those two stats alone make me squeamish on Dunn . . . and I have been the #1 Dunn supporter on these boards FOR YEARS.

Whether you love Graham or not, he was the main reason why TB running backs scored 100 more fantasy points than in 2006. And there's always Caddy lurking in the background, and I AM SURE that Tampa Bay would rather have Williams get touches if healthy that Dunn.

I don't personally see Dunn being brought in to share much of the workload. At this point I look at it as a chance to contribute on occasion when called upon and a chance to wrap things up where they started.

IMO, I see his outlook this year much like Kevin Faulk for the Pats. A few carries here and there (maybe a few more than Faulk), some receptions on third down and on long yardage downs, and maybe a game or two with 10 carries but not a regular workload. So I don't see Dunn getting a ton of work and doing much with it. In the past 10 seasons, the only RB 33 or older to touch the ball 200 times in a season was Emmitt Smith.

I just don't see Dunn getting a chance to get 15 carries and 5 receptions pretty much short of a landslide of injuries.

To each his own on projections and projection methodology I suppose. There are plenty of projections I don't agree with, but that's just it, they are not my projections.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

There are so many holes in the FBG projections, and I'm not picking on them but I pay for a membership every year and this is where I do the majority of my bantering so I'll use them as an example. For instance, Warrick Dunn had his worst year as a RB last year playing on a sinking ship team in the Atlanta Flacons and he still finished 30th. He has been between 15-24 for most of his career. A very undervalued RB2 for the past 10 years in this league. I'll take this a step further...when he was in TB he had reception totals of 44, 68, 44, 54 and then 50 his 1st season in Atlanta...then I don't know if it was Vick, the HC Mora, or what happened but he became invisible in the passing department where his totals slipped under 30 a year. Now he signs a $3 million deal with the Bucs who did not sign him to simply watch him walk around the sidelines as some websites suggest I assure you. What will his totals be? I haven't the foggiest of clues but I do know that I would bet money he finishes well ahead of the ranking he has at 45 this year, and likely will far outperform his draft spot of somewhere in the 12th round or later. I can't put everything I am talking about into his stats but I do think thru some cognitive thinking that one should easily derive that Dunn = value this year, tons of it I might add. What track record does Earnest Graham bring to the table? Dunn could easily find himself getting 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches a game quite a bit this season.

Dunn is 33 and approaching 3,000 touches. His YPCA has fallen off in each of the past three years (1.1 yards from '05 to '06 and another .8 yards from '06 to '07).

I certainly don't want this to become the Warrick Dunn thread and I tried to pick on players that were far out in terms of drafting...we're talking about an RB4 for most teams. but since you brought it up, I mentioned last year about 100 times that Vick being gone would seriously impact the Faclons run game as they were not prepared for life without Vick when they had their 2007 off season. This year they are trying to put the pieces back together and start over. I don't look at Dunn's numbers so much but I look at what is waiting for him in TB...and I think the OL is a vast improvement over what he left behind, and Gruden's Offensive Philosophy is going to put the ball in Dunn's hands. And I was at One Buc place a few weeks back and saw Dunn...the guy doesn't look a day over 22, he is in tip top condition, I can tell you from the eyeball test, this guy will be way undervalued this season...and he has been on the news and a lot of media folks have been interviewing him...the guy is amped up to tak eth efield for the Bucs this year. Now how does all that play into whatever his ypc downhill swirl has been the past couple of years on in Atlanta? A team that will have their 3rd HC in 3 years this upcoming season. I like to give Dunn the benefit of the doubt for now.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

MoP - your point is a solid one, although your examples are little weak - and therein lies the tricky part about projections. You seem to think that Dunn gets 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches per game. There are many that would argue that it could be 5-8 catches and 1-2 catches as an average, especially if the Bucs try to bring back Caddy later in the year and work him in too. Roddy White is another enigma. He had a good year last year. Was it becuase he's finally becoming a good NFL WR? Is it because Atlanta identified him as the #1 WR? Or was it becuase he was the favorite of Harrington/Insurance Salesman/Lefty? Many think it's reasons one and two and that a bad Atlanta team will have to throw alot, so his stats will remain about the same. Some think Atlanta's new QB might be even better than the patchwork rotation they had last year by the end of the season and that the improved offensive line might stabilize the offense, making his stats...well, about the same as last year.

Good points, and I think I was simply saying Dunn "could" find himslef in that situation. Gruden likes RB that can catch and run, and I think he will come up with ways to put the ball in Dunn's hand 10-15 times a game...some weeks more, some weeks less, and I think he will be undervalued...that's just my opinion.Roddy White? I've said what I have to say about him, good luck to all that reach for him.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

There are so many holes in the FBG projections, and I'm not picking on them but I pay for a membership every year and this is where I do the majority of my bantering so I'll use them as an example. For instance, Warrick Dunn had his worst year as a RB last year playing on a sinking ship team in the Atlanta Flacons and he still finished 30th. He has been between 15-24 for most of his career. A very undervalued RB2 for the past 10 years in this league. I'll take this a step further...when he was in TB he had reception totals of 44, 68, 44, 54 and then 50 his 1st season in Atlanta...then I don't know if it was Vick, the HC Mora, or what happened but he became invisible in the passing department where his totals slipped under 30 a year. Now he signs a $3 million deal with the Bucs who did not sign him to simply watch him walk around the sidelines as some websites suggest I assure you. What will his totals be? I haven't the foggiest of clues but I do know that I would bet money he finishes well ahead of the ranking he has at 45 this year, and likely will far outperform his draft spot of somewhere in the 12th round or later. I can't put everything I am talking about into his stats but I do think thru some cognitive thinking that one should easily derive that Dunn = value this year, tons of it I might add. What track record does Earnest Graham bring to the table? Dunn could easily find himself getting 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches a game quite a bit this season.

Dunn is 33 and approaching 3,000 touches. His YPCA has fallen off in each of the past three years (1.1 yards from '05 to '06 and another .8 yards from '06 to '07).

I certainly don't want this to become the Warrick Dunn thread and I tried to pick on players that were far out in terms of drafting...we're talking about an RB4 for most teams. but since you brought it up, I mentioned last year about 100 times that Vick being gone would seriously impact the Faclons run game as they were not prepared for life without Vick when they had their 2007 off season. This year they are trying to put the pieces back together and start over. I don't look at Dunn's numbers so much but I look at what is waiting for him in TB...and I think the OL is a vast improvement over what he left behind, and Gruden's Offensive Philosophy is going to put the ball in Dunn's hands. And I was at One Buc place a few weeks back and saw Dunn...the guy doesn't look a day over 22, he is in tip top condition, I can tell you from the eyeball test, this guy will be way undervalued this season...and he has been on the news and a lot of media folks have been interviewing him...the guy is amped up to tak eth efield for the Bucs this year. Now how does all that play into whatever his ypc downhill swirl has been the past couple of years on in Atlanta? A team that will have their 3rd HC in 3 years this upcoming season. I like to give Dunn the benefit of the doubt for now.

Again, not to turn this into the Warrick Dunn thread, but check out Dunn's last 10-11 games or so of 2006 when not only was Vick still there, but perhaps having his best season. Dunn's production dropped dramtically. Plus, I've watched every game of his for the last 6 years. Is Dunn done - was it all his fault, no. But he definitely holds some culpability for his own decline.Point is this - there is always more information out there and different slants. That's what makes these conversations and forums so interesting because invariably, you read a viewpoint you hadn't considered and now have to take into account in your own evaluation.

 

[Bri]

I'll take this a step further...when he was in TB he had reception totals of 44, 68, 44, 54 and then 50 his 1st season in Atlanta...then I don't know if it was Vick, the HC Mora, or what happened but he became invisible in the passing department where his totals slipped under 30 a year. Now he signs a $3 million deal with the Bucs who did not sign him to simply watch him walk around the sidelines as some websites suggest I assure you. What will his totals be? I haven't the foggiest of clues but I do know that I would bet money he finishes well ahead of the ranking he has at 45 this year, and likely will far outperform his draft spot of somewhere in the 12th round or later. I can't put everything I am talking about into his stats but I do think thru some cognitive thinking that one should easily derive that Dunn = value this year, tons of it I might add. What track record does Earnest Graham bring to the table? Dunn could easily find himself getting 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches a game quite a bit this season.

I'm a big fan of Dunn the person and really appreciate his football ability. That said, he reminds me of Curtis Martin in 2006 offseason. I think everyone respects this guy so much he is welcome to play but truly they're waiting while a pro's pro decides it's time to retire.

Next you need to seriously think about the coaching staff and what/whether they like to run/pass. Offensive Philosophy is so critical. There is actually 2 people running the OC position in Detroit...did you know that? Has this ever worked before? And they have come out and said flat out they are not going to pass the way Martz did...they are sending out the "Conservative Approach" if you listen to anything they have to say. What does that do to Roy Williams who some in here think is bound for 1,300 yds and 10 TD...what about Calvin Johnson and his progression in year 2? I don't have all the answers but these are the things you need to think about. Not just crunching out Roy Williams numbers if and when he plays a full 16 games.

Parcells' Cowboys had a passing game cooridinator and runninggame cooridinator. IMO It was a workaround to another team stealing a coach as it gives them a higher sounding title and since it must involve a promotion it would make it harder. Nonetheless, the two titles don't mean much if the coach is completely in command of the ship.See I picture(not so unlike Parcells) Marinelli saying "I want the offense run this way" and for all he cares he could have 50 OC as long as they do it his way.I think Marinelli plans for his O to be as tough as his Ds have been for years. He's found a better way of wording it by pointing out they'll depend on the running game etc but IMO that's what he's thinking. BTW Most offensive philosphies go out the window when a team is behind in scoring so...

 

[Ministry of Pain]

MOP -- Not sure of the gripe. 1) The projections that we provide on the site aren't based purely on the numbers, and you know that. David, Bob, Chris, Maurile and I spend exhaustive amounts of time looking at the fundamental picture from every angle we can and then synthesize that into projections. Doesn't mean we always get them right (predicting football performance is HARD) or that we don't need people to elicit debate about them (e.g., the Dunn argument you just brought up), but it's not like we spew them out from a black box either.2) Not every subscriber wants the same things. Some just want rankings. They could care less what thought went into the rankings, they want to look at the final, distilled version of all the behind-the-scenes work and be told who we think will perform and at what round we would draft them. Other subscribers want every piece of statistical minutiae they can find. It's not enough to see our projections but they want to make sure our projections are adjusted for strength of schedule, correlate to league historical means, etc.. What I'm most proud of regarding our site, and why I think we've managed to make FBG into the best source of fantasy information and tools on the 'net is that we facilitate ANY TYPE OF OWNER.*** 5 sets of projections, full customizable for those guys who ARE into the stats hard and heavy*** Hundreds of cheatsheets for the guys who who just want to be told who to draft based on their scoring system*** Face offs which are PURELY fundamental, textual debates that give almost no consideration to statistical projections*** Under/Over value analysis which, again, isn't about the numbers but looks at ADP and the situations at hand*** Spotlights which are detailed discussions of the fundamental pros and cons of each player and how that plays into expectations*** Customizable rankings from more than 20 staff [and you can exclude/include whoever you like]And that's to say nothing of all the articles, the Dominator, etc...If you think projections are worthless, don't look at them. Don't worry about them. Leverage the hundreds of other pieces of content on the site that are laser focused on situations as you espouse. On the other hand, recognize that a LOT of owners do care about projections, and we're doing our best to serve every constituency well.

My friend, you took this thread way too personal. I only used FBG because I felt like I could based on the quality staff people we have here...I am not saying that FBG is the devil or anything. I think all of you work very hard and put together the best FF site on the planet, bar none. I say that because I mean it too.And you all have some 20,000+ subscribers, many of them never touch these boards, I look at these threads as sort of a special privilage and I doubt anyone other than the hardcore fans are going to read them. Your subscribers are not all hardcore, many of them simply take what you write and project and use it verbatim...which is absolutely fine.Not sure what else I can say Jason, I appreciate your feedback but this was mostly an idea or theory, not saying my way is the only way, but I think a lot of hardcore FF fans would be better served to lay down the projections for awhile, clear their heads, and maybe take a 2nd look at what they are selling themselves on. We all sell ourselves a story befroe the drafts, we all lock in on certain players we feel are value and that's OK but we need to make sure what we are getting locked into has merits beyond just some simple stat projection.

 

[Kruppe]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

So you are saying we have to form our projections based on:

1. OL

2. Coaching philosophy

3. Surrounding talent

4. Schedule

5. Intangibles

What about:

1. Last years performance...VERY DANGEROUS It sounds like you are saying to ignore this. I don't think many would argue that combined with career performance this is THE best indicator of future performance

2. Career performance...can also get you in trouble

3. Injury history (maybe include drug/crime history here)...intangibles-good

4. Job security...I would class this as Opp/Coach Philsophy, and intangibles

I am not projecting stats, there is a major difference IMO.

Eeven though you are not making stat projections, you are still ranking players. Even though you give them grades or tiers instead of stat projections, you are still ranking them in a certain order that you hope will correlate with their end of year production. So you may have 4 guys with an A grade, but you know what order you will draft them in if they are all available. It's the same thing as a stat projection system, just different.

 

[David Yudkin]

I know MOP doesn't want to make this a Dunn thread, but one last point on WD . . .

Last season, he became just the 6th played since the league merger in 1970 to have 225+ carries and a 3.15 ypc or worse . . .

1 Warrick Dunn 2007 228 3.15

2 Ottis Anderson 1989 325 3.15

3 Tom Sullivan 1974 244 3.11

4 Lamar Smith 2001 313 3.09

5 Eddie George 2001 315 2.98

6 Marion Butts 1994 243 2.89

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I know MOP doesn't want to make this a Dunn thread, but one last point on WD . . .Last season, he became just the 6th played since the league merger in 1970 to have 225+ carries and a 3.15 ypc or worse . . .1 Warrick Dunn 2007 228 3.15 2 Ottis Anderson 1989 325 3.15 3 Tom Sullivan 1974 244 3.11 4 Lamar Smith 2001 313 3.09 5 Eddie George 2001 315 2.98 6 Marion Butts 1994 243 2.89

Wanna make a bet in front of the Shark Pool that Dunn barring injury will end the year ranked ahead of his projection right now at #45? That's all I'm saying David, and you're a great numbers guy, I can't compete with you in the stats department although I feel I actually do know a lot about players stats and can rip them off with the best of them, still you're better at it. If you want to put up a bet, be it money(winnings go to charity of choice), sig, whatever, I'm all in. And I don't think you were saying that I am way off, but you are implying that I am overlooking some crucial stats.

 

[switz]

I can't put everything I am talking about into his stats but I do think thru some cognitive thinking that one should easily derive that Dunn = value this year, tons of it I might add. What track record does Earnest Graham bring to the table? Dunn could easily find himself getting 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches a game quite a bit this season.

Isn't that a projection?

But then I see people just loading in Roddy White's stats from a year ago and I want to scream WTF are you thinking? Projections are very dangerous to put on players that have no track record or history to really go on. And if you think the same top20 at WR last season is going to be the same top20 WR this season, you are delusional and you are going to miss the playoffs this season because you won't get your head out of your you know what.

So it's not projections in themselves that are flawed, it's the way people reach their projections.You commented in another thread about the method I used to come to a projection on Jerry Porter (I think it was Porter). You said it was good.Projections are a fine tool, IF you actually make your own, not based on an individual's stats from last season, but on everything about the player and the team he's on.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

So you are saying we have to form our projections based on:

1. OL

2. Coaching philosophy

3. Surrounding talent

4. Schedule

5. Intangibles

What about:

1. Last years performance...VERY DANGEROUS It sounds like you are saying to ignore this. I don't think many would argue that combined with career performance this is THE best indicator of future performance

2. Career performance...can also get you in trouble

3. Injury history (maybe include drug/crime history here)...intangibles-good

4. Job security...I would class this as Opp/Coach Philsophy, and intangibles

I am not projecting stats, there is a major difference IMO.

Eeven though you are not making stat projections, you are still ranking players. Even though you give them grades or tiers instead of stat projections, you are still ranking them in a certain order that you hope will correlate with their end of year production. So you may have 4 guys with an A grade, but you know what order you will draft them in if they are all available. It's the same thing as a stat projection system, just different.

Of course I rank the players to a degree...but I don't use stats to do so. You're trying to rationalize you're love of stat projection by saying that I am doing the same thing, simply not true. if you want to wrap it up that way, put a bow on it, and present it yourself in that fashion then go for it...but you simply saying its the same thing doesn't make it true. if my post gets people bothered under the collar a little bit, or gets people thinking and uncomfortable with what they are doing presently, then I say good. I want people to think and stop just projecting stats that are meaningless without some serious thought process behind them. So far i am reading a lot of posts from people that are just plugging in numbers basically froma ayear ago...maybe a slight increase or decrease 10% to make it work within the frames of the story they are selling themselves.

 

[Clayton Gray]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

Unless you are ordering players based on the number of birthday cakes they can eat, then you are still making statistical projections based on how many fantasy points they'll score.

 

[Clayton Gray]

I want people to think and stop just projecting stats that are meaningless without some serious thought process behind them. So far i am reading a lot of posts from people that are just plugging in numbers basically froma ayear ago...maybe a slight increase or decrease 10% to make it work within the frames of the story they are selling themselves.

Do you really think this is what happens?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I can't put everything I am talking about into his stats but I do think thru some cognitive thinking that one should easily derive that Dunn = value this year, tons of it I might add. What track record does Earnest Graham bring to the table? Dunn could easily find himself getting 12-15 carries and 3-5 catches a game quite a bit this season.

Isn't that a projection?

But then I see people just loading in Roddy White's stats from a year ago and I want to scream WTF are you thinking? Projections are very dangerous to put on players that have no track record or history to really go on. And if you think the same top20 at WR last season is going to be the same top20 WR this season, you are delusional and you are going to miss the playoffs this season because you won't get your head out of your you know what.

So it's not projections in themselves that are flawed, it's the way people reach their projections.You commented in another thread about the method I used to come to a projection on Jerry Porter (I think it was Porter). You said it was good.Projections are a fine tool, IF you actually make your own, not based on an individual's stats from last season, but on everything about the player and the team he's on.

I do look at touches Switz, it's a good question/comment. I'm saying that based on OC philosophy, HC philosophy, the OL, surrounding talent, schedule...I think Dunn could find himself getting 10-15 touches a game...10 touches might only be about 50 yds including catches...or he might manage to scrape together 100 yards combined some weeks. I'm simply saying that I don't have the exact numbers, but the ranking of #45 sends a smoke signal up to me. It means that Dunn will be on every redraft roster I can get him on...and the fact that he is going so late makes it even easier for me to bring him in as an RB4/5 and laugh all the way to the bank sort of speak. people are so ready to just reload the 2007 season and think those numbers will replicate again...its so silly to think this and IMo very dangerous when you are putting your upcoming season together.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

Unless you are ordering players based on the number of birthday cakes they can eat.

technically, I think that might still be a projection

 

[fantasyplayer]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

So you are saying we have to form our projections based on:

1. OL

2. Coaching philosophy

3. Surrounding talent

4. Schedule

5. Intangibles

What about:

1. Last years performance...VERY DANGEROUS

2. Career performance...can also get you in trouble

3. Injury history (maybe include drug/crime history here)...intangibles-good

4. Job security...I would class this as Opp/Coach Philsophy, and intangibles

I am not projecting stats, there is a major difference IMO.

Um, yes you are. You are using a series of valid factors to rank/tier players. These are the same factors that others use in their projections.Statistical performance is what fantsay football is all about. Anytime you rank/tier players, you're projecting relative statistical peformance, even if it's beneath the surface.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

Unless you are ordering players based on the number of birthday cakes they can eat, then you are still making statistical projections based on how many fantasy points they'll score.

How so? I am not making projections...and I am not drafting on projections. I am drafting based on probability based on research and my own intuition about what I feel I can expect form the teams. Clayton and Birthday Cakes in the same post...I must have struck a nerve somewhere.

 

[fantasyplayer]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

Unless you are ordering players based on the number of birthday cakes they can eat, then you are still making statistical projections based on how many fantasy points they'll score.

How so? I am not making projections...and I am not drafting on projections. I am drafting based on probability based on research and my own intuition about what I feel I can expect form the teams. Clayton and Birthday Cakes in the same post...I must have struck a nerve somewhere.

Isn't this the definition of a projection?

 

[burd]

i dont see much of a difference.

actually, we all to a certain degree mull over non-stats when considering players .... that's why drafts are so unpredictable. someone will think that a younger Saints offense this year will outperform an aging Cowboys offense and select Brees over Romo eventhough nearly every projection out there predicts better stats from Romo.

it sounds like you believe that projections do not take outside factors into account when in fact they do... they just may or may not agree w/ your thinking.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I want people to think and stop just projecting stats that are meaningless without some serious thought process behind them. So far i am reading a lot of posts from people that are just plugging in numbers basically froma ayear ago...maybe a slight increase or decrease 10% to make it work within the frames of the story they are selling themselves.

Do you really think this is what happens?

For about 50-75% of your audience, yes I'm almost positive. I'll even bet there are people that get their draft spot and let's say it is number 3. They know that LT and ADP are likely gone...they will actually make sure whoever they take at #3 has better projection stats from the guy that would go after they pick. Some of you just fell out of your chair but let me explain...what I am trying to point out is if someone wants Addai at #3, they will make projctions that actually allow them to draft him there instead of say Brian Westbrook or SJax...they actually "jimmy" the stats a little. And what i'm saying is there is no need to inflate/deflate numbers, just think thru why you want someone and go from there.

 

[Kruppe]

Whether you put some stats to it or some grade, you are still making projections.

Actually I'm not, I am betting on players based on other categories besides simple stats.

Unless you are ordering players based on the number of birthday cakes they can eat, then you are still making statistical projections based on how many fantasy points they'll score.

How so? I am not making projections...and I am not drafting on projections. I am drafting based on probability based on research and my own intuition about what I feel I can expect form the teams. Clayton and Birthday Cakes in the same post...I must have struck a nerve somewhere.

I must be totally missing the point of what you are saying because it really is starting to sound like you are arguing semantics. You say you are "drafting based on probability" ... "about what I feel I can expect", but it has nothing to do with stats. Probability of what then? What do you feel you will expect from them, besides the statistical production they will bring to your FF squad? Birthday cakes? As I said already, even if you don't put a stat projection to your probablities, you are still drafting based on where you think they will rank in relation to the rest of the league. So you didn't say at the start of the year that your 13th RB will post 1000 yards and score 8 TDs.

And I don't think anyone is getting hot under the collar or defensive.

 

[Jason Wood]

MOP -- Not sure of the gripe. 1) The projections that we provide on the site aren't based purely on the numbers, and you know that. David, Bob, Chris, Maurile and I spend exhaustive amounts of time looking at the fundamental picture from every angle we can and then synthesize that into projections. Doesn't mean we always get them right (predicting football performance is HARD) or that we don't need people to elicit debate about them (e.g., the Dunn argument you just brought up), but it's not like we spew them out from a black box either.2) Not every subscriber wants the same things. Some just want rankings. They could care less what thought went into the rankings, they want to look at the final, distilled version of all the behind-the-scenes work and be told who we think will perform and at what round we would draft them. Other subscribers want every piece of statistical minutiae they can find. It's not enough to see our projections but they want to make sure our projections are adjusted for strength of schedule, correlate to league historical means, etc.. What I'm most proud of regarding our site, and why I think we've managed to make FBG into the best source of fantasy information and tools on the 'net is that we facilitate ANY TYPE OF OWNER.*** 5 sets of projections, full customizable for those guys who ARE into the stats hard and heavy*** Hundreds of cheatsheets for the guys who who just want to be told who to draft based on their scoring system*** Face offs which are PURELY fundamental, textual debates that give almost no consideration to statistical projections*** Under/Over value analysis which, again, isn't about the numbers but looks at ADP and the situations at hand*** Spotlights which are detailed discussions of the fundamental pros and cons of each player and how that plays into expectations*** Customizable rankings from more than 20 staff [and you can exclude/include whoever you like]And that's to say nothing of all the articles, the Dominator, etc...If you think projections are worthless, don't look at them. Don't worry about them. Leverage the hundreds of other pieces of content on the site that are laser focused on situations as you espouse. On the other hand, recognize that a LOT of owners do care about projections, and we're doing our best to serve every constituency well.

My friend, you took this thread way too personal. I only used FBG because I felt like I could based on the quality staff people we have here...I am not saying that FBG is the devil or anything. I think all of you work very hard and put together the best FF site on the planet, bar none. I say that because I mean it too.And you all have some 20,000+ subscribers, many of them never touch these boards, I look at these threads as sort of a special privilage and I doubt anyone other than the hardcore fans are going to read them. Your subscribers are not all hardcore, many of them simply take what you write and project and use it verbatim...which is absolutely fine.Not sure what else I can say Jason, I appreciate your feedback but this was mostly an idea or theory, not saying my way is the only way, but I think a lot of hardcore FF fans would be better served to lay down the projections for awhile, clear their heads, and maybe take a 2nd look at what they are selling themselves on. We all sell ourselves a story befroe the drafts, we all lock in on certain players we feel are value and that's OK but we need to make sure what we are getting locked into has merits beyond just some simple stat projection.

That's cool MOP. I just wanted to make sure we lay all the cards on the table before this conversation got long in the tooth.I will say one thing, projections aren't the holy grail. I love them, and I couldn't imagine not using them to build up my draft lists. But I also use tiering and go with my gut sometimes, too. Here's a story for you...this year will be the 15th for my original fantasy league; the one that started it all for me. While some of the members have churned, there are five of us that have been there from the start. In the 14 prior years, I have won the title twice. One of my best buddies has won the title four times, and made the playoffs 11 of 14 years, and essentially drafts 100% from his gut. Now this isn't a "guppy league." Guys know their stuff and have a ton of experience. Yet my buddy basically shows up each year, has a magazine or website printout from somewhere and just drafts on gut. Some of his picks elicit outright laughter (usually because it's a guy with much lower ADP that he could've theoretically had several rounds later) and yet, when push comes to shove, he's by far and away the most successful owner in our league's history.As a number cruncher, as a guy who reads dozens of news sources in the middle of May when the players are chilling by their pools, this is MADDENING. Last year I went 14-0 in the regular season (the first undefeated season in our league's history) and lost to this guy in the playoffs. MADDENING. But that's what makes this hobby fun. It allows people with all different approaches to compete.

 

[T Bell]

I do not believe for a second that they got all the stats right down to the yds and TD for all the players. It is impossible.

Well this changes everything!

 

[Gatorman]

MOP -- Not sure of the gripe.

1) The projections that we provide on the site aren't based purely on the numbers, and you know that. David, Bob, Chris, Maurile and I spend exhaustive amounts of time looking at the fundamental picture from every angle we can and then synthesize that into projections. Doesn't mean we always get them right (predicting football performance is HARD) or that we don't need people to elicit debate about them (e.g., the Dunn argument you just brought up), but it's not like we spew them out from a black box either.

2) Not every subscriber wants the same things. Some just want rankings. They could care less what thought went into the rankings, they want to look at the final, distilled version of all the behind-the-scenes work and be told who we think will perform and at what round we would draft them. Other subscribers want every piece of statistical minutiae they can find. It's not enough to see our projections but they want to make sure our projections are adjusted for strength of schedule, correlate to league historical means, etc..

What I'm most proud of regarding our site, and why I think we've managed to make FBG into the best source of fantasy information and tools on the 'net is that we facilitate ANY TYPE OF OWNER.

*** 5 sets of projections, full customizable for those guys who ARE into the stats hard and heavy

*** Hundreds of cheatsheets for the guys who who just want to be told who to draft based on their scoring system

*** Face offs which are PURELY fundamental, textual debates that give almost no consideration to statistical projections

*** Under/Over value analysis which, again, isn't about the numbers but looks at ADP and the situations at hand

*** Spotlights which are detailed discussions of the fundamental pros and cons of each player and how that plays into expectations

*** Customizable rankings from more than 20 staff [and you can exclude/include whoever you like]

And that's to say nothing of all the articles, the Dominator, etc...

If you think projections are worthless, don't look at them. Don't worry about them. Leverage the hundreds of other pieces of content on the site that are laser focused on situations as you espouse. On the other hand, recognize that a LOT of owners do care about projections, and we're doing our best to serve every constituency well.

My friend, you took this thread way too personal. I only used FBG because I felt like I could based on the quality staff people we have here...I am not saying that FBG is the devil or anything. I think all of you work very hard and put together the best FF site on the planet, bar none. I say that because I mean it too.And you all have some 20,000+ subscribers, many of them never touch these boards, I look at these threads as sort of a special privilage and I doubt anyone other than the hardcore fans are going to read them. Your subscribers are not all hardcore, many of them simply take what you write and project and use it verbatim...which is absolutely fine.

Not sure what else I can say Jason, I appreciate your feedback but this was mostly an idea or theory, not saying my way is the only way, but I think a lot of hardcore FF fans would be better served to lay down the projections for awhile, clear their heads, and maybe take a 2nd look at what they are selling themselves on. We all sell ourselves a story befroe the drafts, we all lock in on certain players we feel are value and that's OK but we need to make sure what we are getting locked into has merits beyond just some simple stat projection.

That's cool MOP. I just wanted to make sure we lay all the cards on the table before this conversation got long in the tooth.I will say one thing, projections aren't the holy grail. I love them, and I couldn't imagine not using them to build up my draft lists. But I also use tiering and go with my gut sometimes, too.

Here's a story for you...this year will be the 15th for my original fantasy league; the one that started it all for me. While some of the members have churned, there are five of us that have been there from the start. In the 14 prior years, I have won the title twice. One of my best buddies has won the title four times, and made the playoffs 11 of 14 years, and essentially drafts 100% from his gut. Now this isn't a "guppy league." Guys know their stuff and have a ton of experience. Yet my buddy basically shows up each year, has a magazine or website printout from somewhere and just drafts on gut. Some of his picks elicit outright laughter (usually because it's a guy with much lower ADP that he could've theoretically had several rounds later) and yet, when push comes to shove, he's by far and away the most successful owner in our league's history.

As a number cruncher, as a guy who reads dozens of news sources in the middle of May when the players are chilling by their pools, this is MADDENING. Last year I went 14-0 in the regular season (the first undefeated season in our league's history) and lost to this guy in the playoffs. MADDENING.

But that's what makes this hobby fun. It allows people with all different approaches to compete.

I am going to agree with MOP, and add a suggestion (maybe even for a roundtable type setup)...Why doesn't FBG create a "tier list" Have 5 or 10 staff members make a tier list of a, b c, d, e prospects and do this for every position. Once this is done, then you can start to intergrate the cross position thought process based on a VBD system.

My biggest rant about FBG is the strict adherence to the VBD style of drafting which is based on a very flawed premise: Stat Projection.

Once you get your tiers down, you can then think stats to decide who should be at the top and bottom of a tier.

While I agree it is a top down way of looking at this (whereas FBG system is more bottom up) I believe it would add value and discussion to the system.

Gator

 

[fantasyplayer]

MOP -- Not sure of the gripe.

1) The projections that we provide on the site aren't based purely on the numbers, and you know that. David, Bob, Chris, Maurile and I spend exhaustive amounts of time looking at the fundamental picture from every angle we can and then synthesize that into projections. Doesn't mean we always get them right (predicting football performance is HARD) or that we don't need people to elicit debate about them (e.g., the Dunn argument you just brought up), but it's not like we spew them out from a black box either.

2) Not every subscriber wants the same things. Some just want rankings. They could care less what thought went into the rankings, they want to look at the final, distilled version of all the behind-the-scenes work and be told who we think will perform and at what round we would draft them. Other subscribers want every piece of statistical minutiae they can find. It's not enough to see our projections but they want to make sure our projections are adjusted for strength of schedule, correlate to league historical means, etc..

What I'm most proud of regarding our site, and why I think we've managed to make FBG into the best source of fantasy information and tools on the 'net is that we facilitate ANY TYPE OF OWNER.

*** 5 sets of projections, full customizable for those guys who ARE into the stats hard and heavy

*** Hundreds of cheatsheets for the guys who who just want to be told who to draft based on their scoring system

*** Face offs which are PURELY fundamental, textual debates that give almost no consideration to statistical projections

*** Under/Over value analysis which, again, isn't about the numbers but looks at ADP and the situations at hand

*** Spotlights which are detailed discussions of the fundamental pros and cons of each player and how that plays into expectations

*** Customizable rankings from more than 20 staff [and you can exclude/include whoever you like]

And that's to say nothing of all the articles, the Dominator, etc...

If you think projections are worthless, don't look at them. Don't worry about them. Leverage the hundreds of other pieces of content on the site that are laser focused on situations as you espouse. On the other hand, recognize that a LOT of owners do care about projections, and we're doing our best to serve every constituency well.

My friend, you took this thread way too personal. I only used FBG because I felt like I could based on the quality staff people we have here...I am not saying that FBG is the devil or anything. I think all of you work very hard and put together the best FF site on the planet, bar none. I say that because I mean it too.And you all have some 20,000+ subscribers, many of them never touch these boards, I look at these threads as sort of a special privilage and I doubt anyone other than the hardcore fans are going to read them. Your subscribers are not all hardcore, many of them simply take what you write and project and use it verbatim...which is absolutely fine.

Not sure what else I can say Jason, I appreciate your feedback but this was mostly an idea or theory, not saying my way is the only way, but I think a lot of hardcore FF fans would be better served to lay down the projections for awhile, clear their heads, and maybe take a 2nd look at what they are selling themselves on. We all sell ourselves a story befroe the drafts, we all lock in on certain players we feel are value and that's OK but we need to make sure what we are getting locked into has merits beyond just some simple stat projection.

That's cool MOP. I just wanted to make sure we lay all the cards on the table before this conversation got long in the tooth.I will say one thing, projections aren't the holy grail. I love them, and I couldn't imagine not using them to build up my draft lists. But I also use tiering and go with my gut sometimes, too.

Here's a story for you...this year will be the 15th for my original fantasy league; the one that started it all for me. While some of the members have churned, there are five of us that have been there from the start. In the 14 prior years, I have won the title twice. One of my best buddies has won the title four times, and made the playoffs 11 of 14 years, and essentially drafts 100% from his gut. Now this isn't a "guppy league." Guys know their stuff and have a ton of experience. Yet my buddy basically shows up each year, has a magazine or website printout from somewhere and just drafts on gut. Some of his picks elicit outright laughter (usually because it's a guy with much lower ADP that he could've theoretically had several rounds later) and yet, when push comes to shove, he's by far and away the most successful owner in our league's history.

As a number cruncher, as a guy who reads dozens of news sources in the middle of May when the players are chilling by their pools, this is MADDENING. Last year I went 14-0 in the regular season (the first undefeated season in our league's history) and lost to this guy in the playoffs. MADDENING.

But that's what makes this hobby fun. It allows people with all different approaches to compete.

I am going to agree with MOP, and add a suggestion (maybe even for a roundtable type setup)...Why doesn't FBG create a "tier list" Have 5 or 10 staff members make a tier list of a, b c, d, e prospects and do this for every position. Once this is done, then you can start to intergrate the cross position thought process based on a VBD system.

My biggest rant about FBG is the strict adherence to the VBD style of drafting which is based on a very flawed premise: Stat Projection.

Once you get your tiers down, you can then think stats to decide who should be at the top and bottom of a tier.

While I agree it is a top down way of looking at this (whereas FBG system is more bottom up) I believe it would add value and discussion to the system.

Gator

And what do you suggest they use to create their tiers? How about stat projections?No matter how you look at it, whether you're tiering players, looking at the valid factors that MoP listed above, or using your gut; you are projecting the relative statistical performance of the players.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

That's cool MOP. I just wanted to make sure we lay all the cards on the table before this conversation got long in the tooth.I will say one thing, projections aren't the holy grail. I love them, and I couldn't imagine not using them to build up my draft lists. But I also use tiering and go with my gut sometimes, too. Here's a story for you...this year will be the 15th for my original fantasy league; the one that started it all for me. While some of the members have churned, there are five of us that have been there from the start. In the 14 prior years, I have won the title twice. One of my best buddies has won the title four times, and made the playoffs 11 of 14 years, and essentially drafts 100% from his gut. Now this isn't a "guppy league." Guys know their stuff and have a ton of experience. Yet my buddy basically shows up each year, has a magazine or website printout from somewhere and just drafts on gut. Some of his picks elicit outright laughter (usually because it's a guy with much lower ADP that he could've theoretically had several rounds later) and yet, when push comes to shove, he's by far and away the most successful owner in our league's history.As a number cruncher, as a guy who reads dozens of news sources in the middle of May when the players are chilling by their pools, this is MADDENING. Last year I went 14-0 in the regular season (the first undefeated season in our league's history) and lost to this guy in the playoffs. MADDENING. But that's what makes this hobby fun. It allows people with all different approaches to compete.

Great story, I have one similar where I have been in the same league, the original, for about 12+ years, won a title twice, same as you, have taken many loaded teams into the playoffs only to come up short many many times...I don't even remember the years I win as much as I remember the years where I "felt" I should have won.And you're right, all of this mixed into a pot and stirred up is what makes this such a fun hobby.

 

[MCguidance]

MOP -- Not sure of the gripe. 1) The projections that we provide on the site aren't based purely on the numbers, and you know that. David, Bob, Chris, Maurile and I spend exhaustive amounts of time looking at the fundamental picture from every angle we can and then synthesize that into projections. Doesn't mean we always get them right (predicting football performance is HARD) or that we don't need people to elicit debate about them (e.g., the Dunn argument you just brought up), but it's not like we spew them out from a black box either.2) Not every subscriber wants the same things. Some just want rankings. They could care less what thought went into the rankings, they want to look at the final, distilled version of all the behind-the-scenes work and be told who we think will perform and at what round we would draft them. Other subscribers want every piece of statistical minutiae they can find. It's not enough to see our projections but they want to make sure our projections are adjusted for strength of schedule, correlate to league historical means, etc.. What I'm most proud of regarding our site, and why I think we've managed to make FBG into the best source of fantasy information and tools on the 'net is that we facilitate ANY TYPE OF OWNER.*** 5 sets of projections, full customizable for those guys who ARE into the stats hard and heavy*** Hundreds of cheatsheets for the guys who who just want to be told who to draft based on their scoring system*** Face offs which are PURELY fundamental, textual debates that give almost no consideration to statistical projections*** Under/Over value analysis which, again, isn't about the numbers but looks at ADP and the situations at hand*** Spotlights which are detailed discussions of the fundamental pros and cons of each player and how that plays into expectations*** Customizable rankings from more than 20 staff [and you can exclude/include whoever you like]And that's to say nothing of all the articles, the Dominator, etc...If you think projections are worthless, don't look at them. Don't worry about them. Leverage the hundreds of other pieces of content on the site that are laser focused on situations as you espouse. On the other hand, recognize that a LOT of owners do care about projections, and we're doing our best to serve every constituency well.

My friend, you took this thread way too personal. I only used FBG because I felt like I could based on the quality staff people we have here...I am not saying that FBG is the devil or anything. I think all of you work very hard and put together the best FF site on the planet, bar none. I say that because I mean it too.And you all have some 20,000+ subscribers, many of them never touch these boards, I look at these threads as sort of a special privilage and I doubt anyone other than the hardcore fans are going to read them. Your subscribers are not all hardcore, many of them simply take what you write and project and use it verbatim...which is absolutely fine.Not sure what else I can say Jason, I appreciate your feedback but this was mostly an idea or theory, not saying my way is the only way, but I think a lot of hardcore FF fans would be better served to lay down the projections for awhile, clear their heads, and maybe take a 2nd look at what they are selling themselves on. We all sell ourselves a story befroe the drafts, we all lock in on certain players we feel are value and that's OK but we need to make sure what we are getting locked into has merits beyond just some simple stat projection.

That's cool MOP. I just wanted to make sure we lay all the cards on the table before this conversation got long in the tooth.I will say one thing, projections aren't the holy grail. I love them, and I couldn't imagine not using them to build up my draft lists. But I also use tiering and go with my gut sometimes, too. Here's a story for you...this year will be the 15th for my original fantasy league; the one that started it all for me. While some of the members have churned, there are five of us that have been there from the start. In the 14 prior years, I have won the title twice. One of my best buddies has won the title four times, and made the playoffs 11 of 14 years, and essentially drafts 100% from his gut. Now this isn't a "guppy league." Guys know their stuff and have a ton of experience. Yet my buddy basically shows up each year, has a magazine or website printout from somewhere and just drafts on gut. Some of his picks elicit outright laughter (usually because it's a guy with much lower ADP that he could've theoretically had several rounds later) and yet, when push comes to shove, he's by far and away the most successful owner in our league's history.As a number cruncher, as a guy who reads dozens of news sources in the middle of May when the players are chilling by their pools, this is MADDENING. Last year I went 14-0 in the regular season (the first undefeated season in our league's history) and lost to this guy in the playoffs. MADDENING. But that's what makes this hobby fun. It allows people with all different approaches to compete.

Ah, so you were the Patriots...But I totally agree with this. I think it takes some knowledge and talent to get to the playoffs, once there, it truly is a crapshoot. I love it, but yes, it is MADDENING.

 

[LBH]

For a guy thats projecting "45 700 5, if hes lucky" for Roddy White, I dont think you have any buisness at all knocking anyones projections for White. Ill take a sig bet on the over if youre interested. Im feeling lucky

 

[Stinkin Ref]

everything we do when preparing for a draft and the actual draft itself is really in some way about/based on projections....

some people may need to visually see on paper or computer that FBG/other people/etc think Brady will throw for 38 TD's this year...other people in their head just think to themselves "well I think he'll have a good year, but not quite as good as last year".....both are projections, just different ways of getting there..some need to put it down statistically, others just process it by taking in information....

personally I don't take it that far and project all of those things out....I take a player, look at his situation, etc and then think is he going to do as good/better/worse than last year....and why....then draft him accordingly.....for rookies I think does he have a chance at outperforming these guys and then plug them in accordingly.....IMO I think actually projecting stats is a little silly....it's not really about the stats, its about how we think a guy will do compared to other people at his position, which will ultimately be determined by the stats, but before the season it is just where he should be drafted compared to other guys....the stats prior to the season really could just be 1-32 in each statistical category for each guy or 1-120 for WR or whatever.....I dunno, that may not make sense the way I explained it, but I think actually trying to project 3600 yards and 28 TD's and 3 rushing TD's and 120 yards rushing, etc is kind of a waste of time....I think we accomplish the same thing just by analyzing situations and ranking players.......

 

[Ministry of Pain]

For a guy thats projecting "45 700 5, if hes lucky" for Roddy White, I dont think you have any buisness at all knocking anyones projections for White. Ill take a sig bet on the over if youre interested. Im feeling lucky

Touche brotherAnd I stated early on in Wood's threads that I am very uncomfortable with the projection process but I enjoy those threads a lot and enjoy the banter in them. I don't really expect people to take any of my projections in those threads seriously...and typically in most of them eveyone has about the smae stats give or take 10%...till some oddball like me throws up thru the floor stats on Roddy White and all hell breaks loose.

 

[Gatorman]

And what do you suggest they use to create their tiers? How about stat projections?No matter how you look at it, whether you're tiering players, looking at the valid factors that MoP listed above, or using your gut; you are projecting the relative statistical performance of the players.

No kidding. I have been here since the day they opened the message board (old yeller), so I know that you do certain things based on projections whether they are true numbers or in your head.Still, the issue here is that FBG really swings one way in looking at projections, which is what I call "raw number masturbation" where john is better than phil because I project him to have a half a TD more. I have made my FF money in some cases in looking where FBG errs in their thoughts because of these facts (CJ over Hoosh last b/c of one great game 2 years ago is a nice example of this). All I am saying is there is a way to be just as concise without having to project 85 catches, for 1179 yards and 6.5 TDs for a player.Look at the top of the RB tier: LT, ADP, SJ, Addai: all could be #1, so they are in a tier. Now, we can look at what make one a guy I would like more than the other, but what about the 5th guy? Westbrook and Barber... Could they be #1, sure, should they be in the same tier? Well, some have westbrook at 4 instead of Addai, so maybe? Once you look at the tiers, you can examine whio you are comfortable putting in that tier based on who they are keeping company with. While this doesn't matter so much at the top, it sure does in the middle and bottom of the rankings (Would I rather have ladell betts, kevin faulk, or Brandon Jackson?; Ronald Curry, Javon Walker, or Patrick Crayton)...I am not disparaging the FBG method when I say this, but by changing the grouping you can sometimes get as much or more value than hanging yourself on simple math (and flawed projection math at that).

 

[Andy Herron]

Certainly some interesting banter going on here.

I've been playing FF for 20 years now, and over this period I've used about every possible approach imaginable in assessing players for the draft.

That said, there is no real "right" way to do it, but I can assure you there are certainly "wrong" ways to go about it. In the end, it's all in the eye of the beholder as to the value placed on the players no matter how they reach their own conclusion. Everybody "projects" a player's expected performance in one fashion or another. What works for one may not work for another. As far as stat projections go, I don't put much into those at all. It's like imitation crab meat: It might look good, but it's not real. Now I'm not beating up my FBGs brethren here, as I fully realize the work they put into it. The key is to simply use them as one of many "tools" as opposed to a measuring stick.

Another thing that has come up is "the previous season's stats." I can sum that up with one word- "worthless." If there was any value to those, we would see (nearly) the same repetitive performances over and over again each year. Doesn't happen. If it did, what fun would there be in that?

Let me offer one final point. One of my best friends (who is very competitive and always trying to beat me- he never has) thought he came up with a perfect value system to draft by last year to beat me. He used a formula he came up with that intertwined projections (from FBGs) with the previous year's stats. He didn't reveal any of this to me until after the draft. He was so proud to show me afterward that by his chart, he did the best drafting and I did the worst (10 team league). He was doing so much gloating...until the end of the season. I finished first, he finished sixth. It wasn't even close.

1st- 11-2 1878.30 total points

6th- 6-7 1585.52

Just goes to show that value cannot be solely based on numbers alone.

 

[David Yudkin]

I know MOP doesn't want to make this a Dunn thread, but one last point on WD . . .Last season, he became just the 6th played since the league merger in 1970 to have 225+ carries and a 3.15 ypc or worse . . .1 Warrick Dunn 2007 228 3.15 2 Ottis Anderson 1989 325 3.15 3 Tom Sullivan 1974 244 3.11 4 Lamar Smith 2001 313 3.09 5 Eddie George 2001 315 2.98 6 Marion Butts 1994 243 2.89

Wanna make a bet in front of the Shark Pool that Dunn barring injury will end the year ranked ahead of his projection right now at #45? That's all I'm saying David, and you're a great numbers guy, I can't compete with you in the stats department although I feel I actually do know a lot about players stats and can rip them off with the best of them, still you're better at it. If you want to put up a bet, be it money(winnings go to charity of choice), sig, whatever, I'm all in. And I don't think you were saying that I am way off, but you are implying that I am overlooking some crucial stats.

Your complaint was with the projections, not the rankings. So I'll play along if you want. The projection consensus for Dunn was 82 points this year. Since you are so confident that Dunn's projections are going to be way off, let's make the bar 100 fantasy points regardless of year end ranking. So it's over/under on Dunn scoring 100 points and I'll take the under. (In most years, that's around the RB40 anyway).BTW, a RB 33 or older has scored 100 points 21 times out of 155 times a 33 year old or older RB has suited up since 1970 (13.5%). Judging by past history, you basically have a 1 in 8 chance. And Gruden has had two RB score 100 fantasy points in the same season twice in 10 years of coaching. I'll take the side of the numbers.If you win you can have a free one year FBG subscription. You don't even need to put up anything on your side either.

 

[Jason Wood]

And what do you suggest they use to create their tiers? How about stat projections?No matter how you look at it, whether you're tiering players, looking at the valid factors that MoP listed above, or using your gut; you are projecting the relative statistical performance of the players.

No kidding. I have been here since the day they opened the message board (old yeller), so I know that you do certain things based on projections whether they are true numbers or in your head.Still, the issue here is that FBG really swings one way in looking at projections, which is what I call "raw number masturbation" where john is better than phil because I project him to have a half a TD more. I have made my FF money in some cases in looking where FBG errs in their thoughts because of these facts (CJ over Hoosh last b/c of one great game 2 years ago is a nice example of this). All I am saying is there is a way to be just as concise without having to project 85 catches, for 1179 yards and 6.5 TDs for a player.Look at the top of the RB tier: LT, ADP, SJ, Addai: all could be #1, so they are in a tier. Now, we can look at what make one a guy I would like more than the other, but what about the 5th guy? Westbrook and Barber... Could they be #1, sure, should they be in the same tier? Well, some have westbrook at 4 instead of Addai, so maybe? Once you look at the tiers, you can examine whio you are comfortable putting in that tier based on who they are keeping company with. While this doesn't matter so much at the top, it sure does in the middle and bottom of the rankings (Would I rather have ladell betts, kevin faulk, or Brandon Jackson?; Ronald Curry, Javon Walker, or Patrick Crayton)...I am not disparaging the FBG method when I say this, but by changing the grouping you can sometimes get as much or more value than hanging yourself on simple math (and flawed projection math at that).

I guess I'm not sure of the complaint because all we're really arguing is inputs. Tiering is easily done whether you generate your rankings with projections or just use your gut. I tier heavily in drafts. But I build tiers off my projections. If I have three receivers, for example...that project as follows:Receiver A: 137.5 FPTsReceiver B: 133.4 FPTsReceiver C: 130.8 FPTsI would quite likely rank B over A depending on whether I felt more comfortable with a player for any number of non-quantifiable reasons [quantifiable meaning through my statistical projections].

 

[Gatorman]

I guess I'm not sure of the complaint because all we're really arguing is inputs. Tiering is easily done whether you generate your rankings with projections or just use your gut. I tier heavily in drafts. But I build tiers off my projections. If I have three receivers, for example...that project as follows:Receiver A: 137.5 FPTsReceiver B: 133.4 FPTsReceiver C: 130.8 FPTsI would quite likely rank B over A depending on whether I felt more comfortable with a player for any number of non-quantifiable reasons [quantifiable meaning through my statistical projections].

Oh, I agree, and for the most part this is what I do. All I am saying is that sometimes the discussion that occurs around here has to do with the numbers and less to do with the confidence in those numbers. Some people will see McNabb rated lower than he should be (inour minds) b/c of the injury factor. All I am saying is that depeding on how you tier things up, there can be some logjams, and FBG could sure create a whole lot more articles (and some fairly entertaining ones, btw) by going through that process rather than just "Player Spotlight: Ted Ginn" Guys rated within 10 points higher (by projections) are Sanatana Moss, Anthony Gonzalez, and Bernard Berrian. Guys within 10 points lower are Derrick Mason, Vincent Jackson, Sidney Rice, Ronald Curry, and Patrick Crayton... Let stalk about that tier and see who we think is better...For all of FBG content, there are plenty of other sites that did a "better job" on their projections (or look at unlucky's for that matter). There is value looking at this from a different perspective is all I am offerring up, and it jibes in some ways with what MOP says.

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I know MOP doesn't want to make this a Dunn thread, but one last point on WD . . .Last season, he became just the 6th played since the league merger in 1970 to have 225+ carries and a 3.15 ypc or worse . . .1 Warrick Dunn 2007 228 3.15 2 Ottis Anderson 1989 325 3.15 3 Tom Sullivan 1974 244 3.11 4 Lamar Smith 2001 313 3.09 5 Eddie George 2001 315 2.98 6 Marion Butts 1994 243 2.89

Wanna make a bet in front of the Shark Pool that Dunn barring injury will end the year ranked ahead of his projection right now at #45? That's all I'm saying David, and you're a great numbers guy, I can't compete with you in the stats department although I feel I actually do know a lot about players stats and can rip them off with the best of them, still you're better at it. If you want to put up a bet, be it money(winnings go to charity of choice), sig, whatever, I'm all in. And I don't think you were saying that I am way off, but you are implying that I am overlooking some crucial stats.

Your complaint was with the projections, not the rankings. So I'll play along if you want. The projection consensus for Dunn was 82 points this year. Since you are so confident that Dunn's projections are going to be way off, let's make the bar 100 fantasy points regardless of year end ranking. So it's over/under on Dunn scoring 100 points and I'll take the under. (In most years, that's around the RB40 anyway).BTW, a RB 33 or older has scored 100 points 21 times out of 155 times a 33 year old or older RB has suited up since 1970 (13.5%). Judging by past history, you basically have a 1 in 8 chance. And Gruden has had two RB score 100 fantasy points in the same season twice in 10 years of coaching. I'll take the side of the numbers.If you win you can have a free one year FBG subscription. You don't even need to put up anything on your side either.

I'm all in on that bet and I will donate the subscription fee of $25 if I lose to breast cancer research which is a cause I believe in highly. The reason that I have the POV on the rankings though is because of my problems with projections. 100 points? Are we playing PPR...didn't think so, but I still like my chances.

 

[ceo3west]

I have to agree with the OP, I really don't like projections. Especially the top 10 or 15 at each position. These projections are for the most part based on the previous year results, and it's been proven that year after year there is about a 50% turnover in the top 10 RB's & QB's for example. Guys that drafted Gore, Alexander, LJ, etc. last year in the top 10 were following projections, and the same thing will happen this year. I avoided these guys because I had a bad feeling about them. That's why my favorite article every year is Dodds' "From the Gut". This is how I draft for the most part - based on gut feelings. In my experience, the most sucessful fantasy owners won't pick from a list but rather just has that "sense" that this is the year for player X, while the rest of the lemmings will pick someone becuase he's projected next on the list.