LordHusker
Hot sauce addict
Anybody understand why Wayne vaulted this week, to a rather stunning overall WR rank? Higher than Chad freaking Johnson? 
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!
Reggie Wayne ranking - WOW (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter LordHusker
- Start date
Nigel Tufnel
Footballguy
I'm not sure I understand why Phil Rivers dropped.
LordHusker
Hot sauce addict
But two of the top four WRs are on the same TEAM?
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, without seeing any names, I can't comment...
eastcoastbias
Footballguy
me either
NYG Endzone
Footballguy
Bye week then Ravens
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
I really do not understand why anyone cares how the rankings shift one way or the other during the course of the season.
If you have Chad chances are you are going to keep him, if you have Reggie chances are you are going to keep him as well.
Who is ranked above who is really moot.
If you have Chad chances are you are going to keep him, if you have Reggie chances are you are going to keep him as well.
Who is ranked above who is really moot.
Nigel Tufnel
Footballguy
Everybody has a bye week coming.
NYG Endzone
Footballguy
My bad. Bye, Ravens, Steelers.I would trade for Rivers after Week 5
radballs
Footballguy
Not really. The point of it with the respective player values is to also give you an idea of each player's trade value relative to others on the list. I see your point but if others view Reggie Wayne as "more valuable" than Chad Johnson, then the Chad owner is going to have to up the ante in order to obtain Wayne in a trade rather than the other way around.
tonystrong
Footballguy
I'm also a little confused about the ranking for RBs 8-10 (overall 10-14). If you look at their overall ranking, it is not in sync with their ranking by position. I am thinking that it is just a typo.
Overall 10 - RB 10
Overall 12 - RB 8
Overall 14 - RB 9
Not that the rankings matter to any of my decisions, but I figured I'd put it here since the top 250 was being discussed.
Overall 10 - RB 10
Overall 12 - RB 8
Overall 14 - RB 9
Not that the rankings matter to any of my decisions, but I figured I'd put it here since the top 250 was being discussed.
shakeybarn
Footballguy
Projections had him a little bit more potent. No offense, but as of now, Rivers is only throwing his way out of a paper bag... that defense, the running game, much less the matchups... noone has seen anything compelling from what was presupposed in the preseason. He is higher than Brunnell, Frye and Chrissy Simms... what more do want?BJ and Carr are easily outperforming him, on worse teams. We know the potential of Big Ben and McNair...Rather than throwing thine hands in the air... where DOES he belong... who is higher than? and why? Even Trent Green for 10 weeks shoudl outperform Rivers... until we see 240 and 3 and commanding drives when the running game gets shut down... this is just guys fawning over a late round and commanding unwarranted respect.me either
Couch Potato
Footballguy
The 250 forward takes into account future opponent strength of schedule when determining future performance. Prior to last week, he had 15 games remaining includiing Oakland twice. Now his 14 remaining games has a stronger SOS because one of the Raider games has dropped off. SOS was also affected by week 2 performances of the defenses he is yet to face. I'm guessing the remaining defenses, in the aggregate, had a good week 2 thus calculating out to a tougher future SOS. It's all math, guys.
Scorehoard
Footballguy
Portis has 10 rushes for 39 yds and a TD. Hardly played at all this season and he's in the top 20?
McNabb seems kind of low. Just looking at our league totals, HE"S #1 and Peyton is 4!! Not sure how they evaluate this but some of these sure seem out of place.
McNabb seems kind of low. Just looking at our league totals, HE"S #1 and Peyton is 4!! Not sure how they evaluate this but some of these sure seem out of place.
LordHusker
Hot sauce addict
top 250 FORWARD
SSOG
Moderator
I strongly disagree. I own Chad Johnson, and I'm shopping him heavily because I have a ton of other WRs who panned out, too (Randy Moss, Darrell Jackson, Laveranues Coles, etc). I'd rather move one of the second-tier guys... but I can get a lot more for The Chad, so on the block he goes.I never view anyone on my roster as "untradeable".
Islander
Footballguy
Exactly. The top 250 forward is a way to reflect current market values and helps for trades. I find this list very valuable. I wish the top 250 forward was based on more than one guy's opinion however. During the preseason, the FBG rankings are very valuable because they are average of several people, and you can even select who to include in your average and who to exclude. When determining market values, I don't want some guys to be overrated because of one man's opinion (Stallworth?) or guys to be underrated because of one man's opinion. I want the list to reflect the "average" opinion of each player out there. If other FBGs other than Dodds did this, we could come up with a consensus and the outliers we see in the list would go away because for each person who now thinks Stallworth is top 10 (a bit too high), there is someone else that thinks he's not top 25 yet (a bit too low). If we had 5+ opinions, it would hopefully average out to something very close to the correct current market values of each player.
Nigel Tufnel
Footballguy
This makes sense. I thought he showed enough potential to move ahead of certain guys. I realize it's just a guide based on one guy's opinion.
Nigel Tufnel
Footballguy
My hands are on my keyboard. He's looked better than a QB3.
kupcho1
Footballguy
I've asked the staff about this before and the response I got was that it would be impossible to put out all of the content that they do if each staffer had to input projections AND a relative point value for 250 players each week. The work is tedious and time consuming. This sounds like a reasonable explanation to me, and lord knows there is a TON of content put out each week. I truly respect Joe's opinion on players, and I'll be a subscriber again next year regardless, but IMO the Top 250 forward would be infinitely more valuable if it was based on more than one opinion. Even if it was just three or four staffers with each staffer's ranking displayed individually, then with the composite ranking. I certainly don't want to sound ungrateful. This site is far and away the best product on the market. Just adding my opinion and a request for the future should FBG add staff or find some additional bandwidth.Ok, now, here's to the staff. 
Ok, now here's to me. 
BassNBrew
Footballguy
Islander
Footballguy
I agree with you. I am not looking for top 250 forward from as many staffers as for the preseason rankings. I think 3-5 will greatly stabilize the averages. If you average 4 staffers' rankings or 10, the result is very similar.
Judge Smails
Footballguy
I was baffled by the top 250 going forward as well...Actually, not paying much attention to it at this point..
ghosttothepost
Footballguy
Just wanted to add me as anotherIslander said:I agree with you. I am not looking for top 250 forward from as many staffers as for the preseason rankings. I think 3-5 will greatly stabilize the averages. If you average 4 staffers' rankings or 10, the result is very similar.
for this proposed concept. I'd also propose (and have proposed) the same thing re the weekly rankings. To the extent the weekly ranking are simply one man's (Dodd's) opinion, I think they'd be significantly more valuable if 3-4 other staffers' opinions were involved.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ministry of Pain
Footballguy
I gotta jump in here. Does anyone remember David Dodds old site...back in the Ole yellow days and before that? (Uh oh here comes gramps) Seriously, he had a killer site and when he and Joe joined forces sort of speak to create the current FBG, my feeling all along was that Joe brought him in for his expertise in FF...it wasn't just to raise capital or knock him out of the competition. Joe really felt his site was full of info and I know I used to visit it a lot...my god was that 7 or 8 years ago now? WOW! My point is DD is really sharp when it comes to FF knowledge...this is not Dad sitting down and giving you a little parental advice...the guy knows his @#!* so I don't see where having a bunch of other input from the other writers is all that more helpful.The 250 moving forward is a terrific feature but its simply a guide to help you work trades and evaluate your team...at the end of the day you have to make the final decision...not #10 vs #12 on the top250.I'm not coming down on you or anyone but I think DD is getting the wrong side of this. And it's one feature out of how many? How many clicks can you make on subscriber info when Friday rolls around? About 50? 75? There is a ton of stuff on there and this is just one more tool to work with.
Last edited by a moderator:
SSOG
Moderator
Agreed with MoP. Why does everyone need a couple more staffers to do some Top-250 Forwards as an additional resource when they have thousands of posters here on the message board that they can use as a resource, instead?
Same thing with weekly cheatsheets. If you don't like Dodds's cheatsheet, just go to the board and start a thread and I'm sure you'll get dozens of different opinions.
While more top-250 Forwards would be nice, it's hardly necessary, since the top-250 should really just be a starting point, anyway.
Same thing with weekly cheatsheets. If you don't like Dodds's cheatsheet, just go to the board and start a thread and I'm sure you'll get dozens of different opinions.
While more top-250 Forwards would be nice, it's hardly necessary, since the top-250 should really just be a starting point, anyway.
The Jerk
Footballguy
Mostly agree with both SSOG and MoP, but as far as starting threads, good luck as it is now so chic for posters to chime in with "Doesn't this belong in the ACF?" or "Well done making this look like it's not ACF" comments when you try to get a feel for differential among players.
to self-appointed mods.flying8balls
Footballguy
Other than using the rankings to fleece someone in a trade, does it really matter.
harvnlenny
Footballguy
Add me in to the group looking for more staffers to do a top 250 forward. It is the number one reason that I subscribe. I also wish it would come out quicker in the week. My waiver picks for the week are usually done by Tuesday morning. Getting a feel for where someone like Cotchery or Colsten rank would help me to decide if I cut someone like Gabriel or David Givens. I think Dodds is great but I would always rather have more opinions.
Because I want it. I am a paying customer and I have a right to give feedback and make the staff aware of what I want to see in the future. They have the right to provide the content or not. I have the right to continue to come back or to leave. As far as the message board goes, I would love to see a message board ranking every week as well, but there is no such thing as a message board top 250 forward. IMO, it would be a very useful feature if people would be honest with their ranking.
Not one single person is flaming Dodds or being critical. In fact, it is quite the opposite. I have tremendous respect for David and Joe. VBD is a great concept and probably the biggest single piece of knowledge that has made me a successful FF player. I see VBD as akin to value based investing (in the stock market).Still, at the end of the day we get one man's opinion on the top 250 forward. No matter how smart he is about football players, he is one man, and he is not perfect.On the NYSE you get a better idea of a company's value, because hundreds or thousands of customers make offers for a stock. The composite "ranking" of each stock is its price at closing. Just like stock’s value rises and falls every week, so does a player's. More opinions equal a more accurate reflection of the overall market and how it values a certain commodity. That is all we are talking about. If this were a bad idea then one person would set the price of a stock every morning and everyone would buy or sell based on that person's valuation. It does not work that way because multiple opinions give you a more accurate view of the market’s valuation of a commodity.For me personally I use the top 250 to contrast it against my personal evaluation of players and their value. I find one of the biggest challenges in FF to be working trades. It is very difficult to know if other people share your valuation of player A or if you are a little over or under. It is nice to get the opinion of someone I consider a guru on the subject, but I would get more value from a feature that could come closer to nailing the “market value” of a player by incorporating enough opinions to soften the peaks and valleys.A lot of posters don't see the value in such a feature, but I think that those of us who view FF players as smimlar to the stock market would get a ton of value from such a feature.I'm also serious about a message board ranking, or even a website where people could go to input their player rankings. I don't need other people's information to make my own decisions. Knowing how the market feels can be a big advantage.
Yes, actually it can also be useful when trying to decide between picking up player A or player B from the waiver wire.If you let it make your decisions for you then you probably don't get much out of it. Using it to check your own thoughts on a player's prospects going forward can be quite helpful.
BassNBrew
Footballguy
This should be in the FFA.The Jerk said:Mostly agree with both SSOG and MoP, but as far as starting threads, good luck as it is now so chic for posters to chime in with "Doesn't this belong in the ACF?" or "Well done making this look like it's not ACF" comments when you try to get a feel for differential among players.SSOG said:
radballs
Footballguy
What are you talking about? If you looked at the player values from the list, it's not even close to saying that CJ plus Maroney is equal to Wayne. I'm not even sure what your point is. The closest RB that would bridge the gap between Wayne and CJ is LenDale White. If someone would rather have Wayne by giving up CJ and White, I could see that. Personally, I'd still rather have CJ straight up over Wayne but that was my interpretation of the player values from the top 250 list."OK, Chad Johnson and Laurence Maroney for Wayne"
Men-in-Cleats
Footballguy
Down from 3 in 2004.
SSOG
Moderator
Actually, in 2004, NONE of the Indy WRs were in the top 4.There were 3 in the top 11, though...
Edit: I didn't hear anyone sounding all shocked when Boldin and Fitzgerald were both discussed as top-5 WRs, and Indy's passing offense is a lot better than Arizona's.
Last edited by a moderator:
oukurt
Footballguy
I agree, but some people are truly offended when their favorite player slips a bit in the rankings. How dare you Dodds!
harvnlenny
Footballguy
I would love to see a message board top 250. Now do any of us have the time or desire to do this? I think we would soon find out why Dodds is the only one that does this. I for one am lazy and if you check my history you will see that I rarely post here. I do read from this forum many times a day. This message board shapes the rankings every week. Hm.. if only I could kick this lazyness and help contribute to this. Is anyone thinking of doing something like this?
Da Guru
Fair & Balanced
Dodds gets paid to do it, he is one of the founders of this site. That is why he does it. Do you think Dodds does this just for pure entertainment?
thatguy
Footballguy
Or, they just want some insight into Dodds thought process, which they're certainly entitled to. And if you ask for some answers, Dodds is usually more than happy to comply.
kupcho1
Footballguy
My point is that the CJ owner wouldn't give you anything else in a trade for Reggie Wayne. Not Maroney, not White, not a bushel of old soggy footballs or even Maurice Clarett (OK, maybe he'd throw in Maurice Clarett).The CJ owner isn't going to ante up anything else, and the idea that he would or would have to is ludicrous.What are you talking about? If you looked at the player values from the list, it's not even close to saying that CJ plus Maroney is equal to Wayne. I'm not even sure what your point is. The closest RB that would bridge the gap between Wayne and CJ is LenDale White. If someone would rather have Wayne by giving up CJ and White, I could see that. Personally, I'd still rather have CJ straight up over Wayne but that was my interpretation of the player values from the top 250 list."OK, Chad Johnson and Laurence Maroney for Wayne"
OldMilwaukee
IBL Representative
I would love to see Dodds explain any major movement with an accompanying link, like Joe did in the projections!!
Any chance of this David?
Any chance of this David?
Couch Potato
Footballguy
David does the preseason projections and the tweak explanations, not Joe. I'm sure they talk and Joe provides input, but the projections are David's baby.
radballs
Footballguy
I think you and I actually agree. You like CJ better than Wayne and so do I. I'm saying that if someone (and his prospective trade partner) follows and completely agrees with the player trade values in the top 250, then the CJ owner would have to give up something extra to "move up" to get Wayne. The whole point is that you're trying to maximize the total player values that you are trying to acquire and give back as few as possible, therefore making it a trade in your favor. If you don't agree with the player values, then tweak things to make your own. In essence, you're just trying to make moves that improves your team but you have to use your own sense of each player's respective value.My point is that the CJ owner wouldn't give you anything else in a trade for Reggie Wayne. Not Maroney, not White, not a bushel of old soggy footballs or even Maurice Clarett (OK, maybe he'd throw in Maurice Clarett).The CJ owner isn't going to ante up anything else, and the idea that he would or would have to is ludicrous.What are you talking about? If you looked at the player values from the list, it's not even close to saying that CJ plus Maroney is equal to Wayne. I'm not even sure what your point is. The closest RB that would bridge the gap between Wayne and CJ is LenDale White. If someone would rather have Wayne by giving up CJ and White, I could see that. Personally, I'd still rather have CJ straight up over Wayne but that was my interpretation of the player values from the top 250 list."OK, Chad Johnson and Laurence Maroney for Wayne"
kupcho1
Footballguy
Actually, what I'm saying is that with two premier players - any two, doesn't have to be RW vs. CJ - player rankings go out the window once the players are drafted. Owners (myself included) tend to have an emotiona investment (for want of a better term) with the player they drafted, and subsequently value them a little more highly than they otherwise might. Unless the relative value (backed up by a website ranking or not) is meaningful, you are unlikely to get a deal done. I just don't see a lot of trades where that happens.You might see quantity for quality, but you rarely if ever see quality for quality + something. The only time that might happen is if one side of the quality equation is severely underperforming or is injured but expected back for the playoffs and one team can wait, and one cant. (Say, Wayne for S Smith + something)I think you and I actually agree. You like CJ better than Wayne and so do I. I'm saying that if someone (and his prospective trade partner) follows and completely agrees with the player trade values in the top 250, then the CJ owner would have to give up something extra to "move up" to get Wayne. The whole point is that you're trying to maximize the total player values that you are trying to acquire and give back as few as possible, therefore making it a trade in your favor. If you don't agree with the player values, then tweak things to make your own. In essence, you're just trying to make moves that improves your team but you have to use your own sense of each player's respective value.My point is that the CJ owner wouldn't give you anything else in a trade for Reggie Wayne. Not Maroney, not White, not a bushel of old soggy footballs or even Maurice Clarett (OK, maybe he'd throw in Maurice Clarett).The CJ owner isn't going to ante up anything else, and the idea that he would or would have to is ludicrous.What are you talking about? If you looked at the player values from the list, it's not even close to saying that CJ plus Maroney is equal to Wayne. I'm not even sure what your point is. The closest RB that would bridge the gap between Wayne and CJ is LenDale White. If someone would rather have Wayne by giving up CJ and White, I could see that. Personally, I'd still rather have CJ straight up over Wayne but that was my interpretation of the player values from the top 250 list."OK, Chad Johnson and Laurence Maroney for Wayne"
