Upgrade/Downgrade FBG Article (1 Viewer)

[pizzatyme]

I'm a huge FBG supporter, but this article is baffling to me. I see nothing here but the obvious. Player X had a good game=upgrade. The question is, upgrade to where? over who?

When it says downgrade Drew Brees, does that mean to a QB2 status?

What value is anyone finding with this article? I really want to use it effectively. Seems like a waste of time to produce and read.

Help, please!

 

[Wadsworth]

I scan it to make sure there was not a positive performance or a reason to downgrade a player that I somehow missed. I do not think it is a great tool for actually adjusting how you value players, but it is a quick way to make sure you did not miss meaningful information.

 

[dagwood]

It provides information.

FBG writes close to 100 articles / reports per week.

If it does not present information that interests you or present in a format you like then read one of the other articles.

Seems like common sense but I guess some people think that FBG is their own personal employee who should cater to their SPECIFIC wants and desires.

 

[Black]

Alot of people don't get to see all the games, or necessarily understand the various performances from the weekend. This article just tells you how everyone did, and if they are trending up or down.

 

[atcdav]

Dodds is 2nd most accurate rankings expert so far this year according to Fantasypros. That has value

 

[atcdav]

I'm a huge FBG supporter, but this article is baffling to me. I see nothing here but the obvious. Player X had a good game=upgrade. The question is, upgrade to where? over who?When it says downgrade Drew Brees, does that mean to a QB2 status?What value is anyone finding with this article? I really want to use it effectively. Seems like a waste of time to produce and read.Help, please!

I read those as a tell to whether they had a good or bad game, nothing more. I dont take it as an upgrade or downgrade to any other player than their previous weeks rank. It's relative only to the individual player, IMO

 

[pizzatyme]

I'm a huge FBG supporter, but this article is baffling to me. I see nothing here but the obvious. Player X had a good game=upgrade. The question is, upgrade to where? over who?When it says downgrade Drew Brees, does that mean to a QB2 status?What value is anyone finding with this article? I really want to use it effectively. Seems like a waste of time to produce and read.Help, please!

I read those as a tell to whether they had a good or bad game, nothing more. I dont take it as an upgrade or downgrade to any other player than their previous weeks rank. It's relative only to the individual player, IMO

Fair enough, I just think they should say that then. I mean make it more clear. Otherwise, it seems a waste of time to produce.Dodds projections results have zero to do with this article.And for the guy who feels the need to scold me, thanks for your input. I'm trying to help here. My point is maybe their time is better served elsewhere.

 

[Jack McCoy]

The Upgrade/Downgrade article has actually always been one of my favorite things that FBG produces, not so much for the upgrades and downgrades themselves, but for the thorough description of what each player did (or didn't do) to warrant that judgment. It's always good, informative reading.

 

[pizzatyme]

OK, so I am totally wrong here. I went back and re-read this week's article and I have to be honest, I have never scrolled down to the full reasoning and results.

I stand corrected. My apologies.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

OK, so I am totally wrong here. I went back and re-read this week's article and I have to be honest, I have never scrolled down to the full reasoning and results.I stand corrected. My apologies.

I remember initially being baffled by the value of that "article" until one day I realized there were writeups explaining each one below. They're definitely a good read. FBG should make it more clear at the top of the page that there are explanations below, there's really no indication that it's anything but a list. I just always assumed the hyperlinks pointed to the player page on FBG so I never clicked them.

 

[pizzatyme]

Where the article was losing me was at the Kickers. Once I got there I just gave up. I mean, they're just kickers.

I agree with adding something that says "info below".

 

[Biabreakable]

Where the article was losing me was at the Kickers. Once I got there I just gave up. I mean, they're just kickers. I agree with adding something that says "info below".

Really? Who says you will bother to read that? Silly person.

 

[pizzatyme]

Well, I took the time to read and respond to your post.

 

[pittstownkiller]

Well, I took the time to read and respond to your post.

 

[Multiple Scores]

The IDP up/downgrade article is useful to me, defense doesn't get the coverage offense does obviously.

 

[zed2283]

I don't think it's very useful, but that's just me. They should call it something other than upgrade/downgrade because, yes, it is based on who had a good game and who had a bad game.

 

[solorca]

I liked the article in the past, but I've found that recently (into last season, and especially in the early part of this season), it's ridiculously reactionary. Brandon Marshall had a bad game, he's a downgrade! Danny Amendola had a good game, he's an upgrade!

Just because a guy has a good week or bad week doesn't mean that his overall value should raise/drop for the remainder of the season.

 

[pantagrapher]

I don't think it's very useful, but that's just me. They should call it something other than upgrade/downgrade because, yes, it is based on who had a good game and who had a bad game.

They do that. But they also explain when not to get excited by a big game (e.g. so and so was facing a rookie cornerback and the WR1 was hobbled in the first quarter, so this is only a slight upgrade) or panicked by a bad game (e.g. QB's wide receivers dropped two sure TDs and tipped one ball that was intercepted). Stuff like that you wouldn't know just by looking at the stats.

 

[pittstownkiller]

I take this article to be akin to "trending" arrows on other websites. If a player has a bad game he is trending down and obviously the reverse; it is completely reactionary. The usefulness of the article comes in the write-ups; there is a lot of info to peruse here.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I liked the article in the past, but I've found that recently (into last season, and especially in the early part of this season), it's ridiculously reactionary. Brandon Marshall had a bad game, he's a downgrade! Danny Amendola had a good game, he's an upgrade!

Amendola is actually a good counterexample to your assertion.In week one, Amendola had a very good game, but was a downgrade. (One of the few things I disagreed with Matt about that week.)

To clarify what the upgrades and downgrades mean, they are based on the Top 250 Forward list from the previous week. If Matt thinks the player should be moved up in the next Top 250 Forward list, he gets an upgrade. If the player should be moved down, he gets a downgrade. (At least that's how it worked a couple years ago when I was involved with it.)

A good performance will often, but not always, merit a move up on the Top 250 Forward list. It's often, but not always, a signal that the player will be more involved in the offense going forward, or that he is more talented than many had previously realized, etc. But sometimes the good performance is illusory, a statistical aberration that does not portend more of the same going forward. I think Matt generally does a great job of figuring out which is which and explaining why.

 

[pizzatyme]

Maurile, thanks for the explanation! I think it would be helpful to post this somewhere in the article along with the blurb that additional info is below.

Thanks again!

 

[dagwood]

OK, so I am totally wrong here. I went back and re-read this week's article and I have to be honest, I have never scrolled down to the full reasoning and results.I stand corrected. My apologies.

:thumbs up:Takes a big man to realize and then admit he is an idiot....General Rule - you get the most value from the articles if you actually read them.

 

[Ignoratio Elenchi]

OK, so I am totally wrong here. I went back and re-read this week's article and I have to be honest, I have never scrolled down to the full reasoning and results.I stand corrected. My apologies.

:thumbs up:Takes a big man to realize and then admit he is an idiot....General Rule - you get the most value from the articles if you actually read them.

This seems like an unnecessarily dooshy post.

 

[pittstownkiller]

OK, so I am totally wrong here. I went back and re-read this week's article and I have to be honest, I have never scrolled down to the full reasoning and results.I stand corrected. My apologies.

:thumbs up:Takes a big man to realize and then admit he is an idiot....General Rule - you get the most value from the articles if you actually read them.

This seems like an unnecessarily dooshy post.

 

[Wadsworth]

OK, so I am totally wrong here. I went back and re-read this week's article and I have to be honest, I have never scrolled down to the full reasoning and results.I stand corrected. My apologies.

:thumbs up:Takes a big man to realize and then admit he is an idiot....General Rule - you get the most value from the articles if you actually read them.

This seems like an unnecessarily dooshy post.

I haven't read this thread, but I agree 100%.

 

[plastik]

I don't think it's very useful, but that's just me. They should call it something other than upgrade/downgrade because, yes, it is based on who had a good game and who had a bad game.

They do that. But they also explain when not to get excited by a big game (e.g. so and so was facing a rookie cornerback and the WR1 was hobbled in the first quarter, so this is only a slight upgrade) or panicked by a bad game (e.g. QB's wide receivers dropped two sure TDs and tipped one ball that was intercepted). Stuff like that you wouldn't know just by looking at the stats.

This.Two additional things come to mind. I often scan through the list quickly to see if anything catches my eye as contradicting my impression from box scores for games I didn't see. Like the Amendola comment from above. Also, if I'm trying to make a decision on who to put in a waiver claim for, I'll sometimes look to the justifications in this article to help me distinguish between guys who are close. Nothing earth shattering, but quick and easy.

 

[pizzatyme]

OK, so I am totally wrong here. I went back and re-read this week's article and I have to be honest, I have never scrolled down to the full reasoning and results.I stand corrected. My apologies.

:thumbs up:Takes a big man to realize and then admit he is an idiot....General Rule - you get the most value from the articles if you actually read them.

thanks for the laugh! With so many articles available and so many flooding my inbox, I tend to skim through them. But, you're right. :thumbsup:Thanks for taking the time to point this out.

 

[Mister CIA]

OK, so I am totally wrong here. I went back and re-read this week's article and I have to be honest, I have never scrolled down to the full reasoning and results.I stand corrected. My apologies.

:thumbs up:Takes a big man to realize and then admit he is an idiot....General Rule - you get the most value from the articles if you actually read them.

Well said little man.