Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
Week 3 IDP Rankings (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Otter
- Start date
are there any particular rankings which you have a problem with?just curious.
Pretty bad, IMO.
Weiner Dog
Footballguy
Examples??
Pretty bad, IMO.
I'm having a hard time finding any info on Parrish. Do we know for sure that he's out?I don't see him even listed on the NFL injury report.
Otter
Footballguy
Well, if you want to discuss DBs first, here are some of the players that I think are ranked TOO low. Some should be significantly higher, IMHO:R. Harrison - 14are there any particular rankings which you have a problem with?just curious.
Pretty bad, IMO.
G. Wilson - 25
K. Rhodes -40
N. Ferguson - 42
M. Doss - 71
B. Sanders - 70
T. Williams - 75
M. Williams - 61
M. Boulware - 38
D. Gibson - 86
Some of these guys should be ranked considerably higher. I would have bet the house that Harrison would be top-3 this week against the Steelers, who love to run the football. Most of these guys are at the SS position. I can see that you ranked a lot of CBs high this week, because they'll be getting lots of action against passing teams. However, I usually guage rankings on tackles. Interceptions are bonuses that cannot be predicted. I do not consider passes defended, either; just tackles/sacks/ints/fumble recoveries.
There are also guys that I think are ranked too high, but I think you get my drift.
E-A-G-L-E-S
Footballguy
Roy Williams #86 at DB?I see him gettina a sack with 5-6 total tackles, maybe a pass defendedIs the poor ranking b/c they don't expect the 49ers to sustain any drives?
Last edited by a moderator:
So that we are all on the same page, this is the FBG standard scoring system for IDPs:Solos = 1ptAssists = .5ptSacks = 3ptsINTs = 4ptsFF/FR = 2ptsPD = 1ptAlso, for the record, I had nothing to do with the projections or cheatsheet rankings. John Norton takes care of those so he would have to answer any specific questions you have.With that said, let's discuss some of the players you mentioned:Rodney Harrison faces a Steelers team that currently ranks #29 in fantasy points allowed to DBs. In week 1, the Titans SS Tank Williams put up 5 solos and 3 assists against the Steelers offense. In week 2, the Texans SS CC Brown put up 3 solos and 3 assists. So, despite your intuition, this certainly doesn't look like a great matchup for Harrison. As for Harrison, he's had 1 bad game (1 solo, 3 asst) against the Raiders and 1 good game (7 solos, 1 asst, 1 PD) against the Panthers. Taking all of that into consideration, his projection of 9 solos and 2 assists seems pretty generous and puts him as the #9 ranked DB. (I'm not sure why the projections differ from the cheatsheets, but will look into that).Gibril Wilson faces a Chargers team that ranks #12 in fantasy points allowed to opposing DBs. In week 1, the Cowboys SS put up 5 solos, 2 assists, and .5 sacks against the Chargers. In week 2, the Broncos SS put up 5 solos against the Chargers. In his first 2 games, Wilson has been solid but not spectacular with a 4 solo, 1 asst, 1 INT, 1 PD game against the Cardinals (who rank #1 in fantasy points allowed to DBs) and a 5 solo, 4 asst performance against the Saints (who rank #15). Based on all of that, a projection of 6 solos, 3 assists, and 1 PD seems very realistic.Kerry Rhodes faces a Jaguars team that ranks #9 in fantasy points allowed to DBs so far. He had a great debut game against the Chiefs with 9 solos, 1 asst but the team got blown out. In week 2 in a close game against the Dolphins, he came back to earth a bit with a 3 solo, 1 asst, 1 PD game. In week 1, the Seahawks SS Michael Boulware put up 6 solos against the Jags offense. In week 2, Colts SS Mike Doss put up 9 solos. Based on all of that information, the projection of 6 solos and 1 assist might be a tad low but not unreasonably so. Basically, of the 4 similar matchups so far, 2 went over that, 1 was below that and 1 was right on.Nick Ferguson faces a Chiefs team which ranks #19 in fantasy points allowed to DBs. In week 1, he put up 10 solos, 2 asst, and 1 PD against Miami who ranks #10 in points allowed to DBs. In week 2, he put up 5 solos against the Chargers who rank #12. We've already mentioned the big game the Jets SS put up against the Chiefs offense in week 1 but that game was a blowout and may not apply to this week's game very well. In week 2, Oakland SS Derrick Gibson managed only 3 solos and 1 PD. Based on the above, a projection of 6 solos and 1 asst for Ferguson seems pretty realistic to me.Mike Doss has only played 1 game and it was against the Jaguars, who rank #9 in fantasy points allowed to DBs so far. This week, he'll face the Browns who rank #18. In week 1, the Bengals SS Madieu Williams managed only 4 solos, 2 asst, and 1 PD against the Browns. In week 2, Packers SS Mark Roman only managed 3 solos and 1 asst against the Browns offense. Based on the all that, a projection of 5 solos seems reasonable to me.Bob Sanders has the same matchup, but will be playing at FS. In week 1 against the Ravens (who rank #28), Sanders only managed 2 solos and 1 asst. In week 2 against the Jaguars (rank #9), Sanders managed 9 solos, 2 asst, and 1 pd. In week 1, Bengals FS Kaesviharn put up 4 solos and 2 asst. In week 2, Packers FS Nick Collins only managed to collect 2 solos and 3 asst. Based on all of that info, a week 3 projection of 5 solos looks pretty reasonable.The exact same analysis can be done for all of the players you mentioned. So far, none of these look too bad to me.
Last edited by a moderator:
SpecOpLoad
Footballguy
Urlacher??Why the big drop??He's been money!!
Roy Williams has had some success with big plays so far this year (1.5 sacks, 1 FF) but his tackle numbers are down (7 solos, 4 assists). This week, he faces a 49ers team that simply can't run the ball and only ranks #27 in fantasy points allowed to DBs. In week 1, Rams SS Adam Archuleta put up 3 solos and 1 asst against them. In week 2, Eagles SS Michael Lewis put up 4 solos and 1 PD against them. Looks like a pretty bad matchup for Roy...unless he is able to get a sack, which is pretty tough to predict. A projection of 4 solos and 1 asst looks reasonable to me.
but I don't see that mentioned anywhere else on the internet.I've already sent an email to try and figure out if that can be confirmed or not. A google news search and look at the official NFL injury report turned up nothing.
Urlacher is projected for 9 solos, 2 assists, and 1 PD. If you ignore his 3 sacks in the first 2 weeks (which are hard to predict), those tackle numbers would be better than either game he's had so far. The Bengals rank #9 in fantasy points allowed to LBs so I'd start Urlacher with confidence.
Otter
Footballguy
Aaron,So I get this right... If an analysis was done on every player, then the rankings are what have been posted? I respectfully disagree...
Although you base your argument on what the opposing defenses have done through two weeks, you must consider the offenses against those defenses. With that said, it is impossible to predict based on one or two previous matchups. Also, you cannot compare Rodney Harrison to CC Brown or Tank Williams. Harrison has consistently been in the top 3 in defensive backs scoring. Granted he has some below average games, as he has some tremendous games. But just because CC Brown or Tank Williams didn't necessarily have huge games against the Steelers doesn't mean that Harrison won't. You can use this analogy for every player you mentioned. Harrison at #14? You'll never convince me that there are 13 better options this week. Same goes with Boulware (37 better options?) or N. Ferguson (41 better options?) There should be more than just what the opposing offenses have given in the past two weeks. I stand by my original view that the rankings are way off. Just my $.02. Also, there are more questions with the rankings, other than the ones that I've mentioned, as a few have already pointed out.
With respect to Harrison, I'm going to side with Otter: He has produced against Pitt - the two games last year:Reg season: 10-8-0, no INTPlayoff game: 7-2-0, 1 INTThat first game, they lost Law to injury early and didn't have him in the playoffs. Add the fact that the Pats LB's aren't named Brushi and Johnson - you have a recipe for success....9-4-0, 1INT.
Rodney Harrison is currently projected to perform as the #9 DB this week. In week 1 against the Raiders, his point total placed him #141 among fantasy DBs. In week 2 against the Panthers, his point total placed him as the #24 ranked fantasy DB.If the last 2 weeks are too small of a sample size for you (which is understandable), the Steelers ranked #10 in fantasy points allowed to opposing DBs for the 2004 season. Also, Harrison had a monster game against the Steelers in game 7 with 11 solos and 7 assists, which was BY FAR his best tackle game of the season. He followed that up in the playoffs with 7 solos, 1 sack, 2 INTs, and 2 PDs. He clearly was a huge factor in those games. If you think last year's numbers are a better indicator for Harrison, then he should certainly be ranked higher and probably #1 overall. But, the difference between the #1 and #9 ranked fantasy DB really isn't enough to argue about. Fact is that he's already projected pretty highly despite some disappointing performances to start the year.
It's a tough call making predictions and projections...whereas you may choose to weight past performance very heavily, others may not. The Patriots and Steelers teams are slightly different from what they were like last year. Harrison is a year older....the Patriots have rebuilt their ILB tandem...Willie Parker is a much different runner than Bettis...Roethlisberger is older and Plaxico is gone, etc.
Last edited by a moderator:
I rated Schobel as a strong matchup this week as Atlanta ranks #4 in fantasy points allowed to DL this year and they ranked #6 through all of 2004. I expect him to exceed John's projection but 4 solos and 1 assist isn't unreasonably low.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sofa King Money
Footballguy
How about some light on the NO DL rankings...C Grant #1 preseason and highly ranked weeks 1 & 2 but this week..??
Charles Grant is questionable this week with a toe injury. If he doesn't play, that should open up a lot more playing time for Will Smith.
Last edited by a moderator:
Otter
Footballguy
Aaron... I'm not arguing at all. I'm just adding dialogue, that's all. Not to beat a dead horse, what about M. Boulware or G. Wilson or N. Ferguson or T. Williams or either B. Sanders or M. Doss. Using your analogy, I can understand them dropping somewhat... But to #40, #42, #70, #71???? No way. I can understand somewhat about Sanders or Doss being lower, but not that low. Granted they both had huge games last week, and I'm sure they won't duplicate that effort. But one of those guys (probably Doss because he is SS) will have a solid game. Let me ask you something... If Sanders was SS instead of FS, would you flip flop he and Doss, or would you move him into the top 10? My same argument goes for T. Williams. There's no way 74 DBs should be ranked ahead of him, IMO. Same goes for the others. I just think there should be more factors considered when the rankings come out. Last year, I thought they were pretty good. This year, every week so far has been under par. I can't speak for the other viewers here, but I do think I'm in the majority when I write that.
I'm not trying to argue either. It is VERY difficult to try and accurately project IDP stats from week to week. I think you may be focusing a bit too much on the cheatsheet and not enough on the projections. Take a look at the projections for some of those players...they really do not seem all that low to me. Also, notice that only 1 point separates the #45 and #76 ranked DBs this week. 2 points separates the #45 and #111 ranked DB. It's a very fine line. Most of the time, you're going to just have to go with the guy you feel best about.Cheatsheets are shortcuts for people who don't want to do any of the research themselves...but they are not infallible. We provide a lot of information beyond the cheatsheets for you guys to use in setting your lineups.
Also, I'm sure John would appreciate any constructive criticism people have for him in trying to improve the weekly IDP projections. Feel free to send him an email at Norton@Footballguys.com
Last edited by a moderator:
Otter
Footballguy
I actually was looking at the cheatsheet, and not the projections. I also know that I speak for the majority that you guys provide a lot of good information beyond the cheatsheets, and we all appreciate it. I also believe that these forums help a lot of people. With that said, there will always be constructive criticism, and that's all it is.
Sofa King Money
Footballguy
One suggestion might be to have some codes or legend so that if a player falls or rises over a certain percentage of the normal range (due to injury, matchup, etc.) we have some inclination as to why that is the case, can do our own research and can make adjustments accordingly.Case in point, due to Grant's low projections/possible injury/weak start in weeks 1/2 and Norton's projections on Vanden Bosch/his upcoming matchups with STL, Indy & Houston, decided to pick him up til Grant turns it around.
UrlacherIsGod
Footballguy
Pollack ahead of Brooks @ LB? From where did all of this instant love for Pollack come? He's(Pollack) moved up quickly without much production.
inbreeder
Footballguy
Using specific projections to rank a cheatsheet leads to issues like this. I understand the point of making projections, but they're going to lead to wild variability in the cheatsheet rankings. Aaron made the most important point so far in this thread and it continues to be overlooked. There is little difference between the raw projected output of many of the DBs this week.I'm not a company man, but the cheatsheets are to be used as a guide, not gospel. If you start David Pollack instead of Mike Peterson on the strength of projections you're a goofball. The projections suggest that David Pollack may have a breakthrough, Karlos Dansby-in-week-one-like game this week. My reading of the cheatsheets would be that if you're looking at your LB4 - LB6 this week as a bye week replacement, you may want to consider Pollack as a good play over similar questionable plays like Steve Foley or Courtney Watson. See Norton's EOTG for why.Aaron has made the case for why the base projections are mostly valid. Look deeper and don't allow yourself to be spoon-fed. Don't hide behind a claim that "this isn't what I paid for." If you decide to start Dhani Jones over Ian Gold because one is projected to get an INT this week and the other isn't, well then you've only got yourself to blame if Jones underperforms the projection. If you see that a player is higher/lower relatively speaking and use the other IDP information provided during the week to understand the reasons behind the projection, then you're getting the most out of the FBG.I'm not defending Pollack at 5, or Lamont Thompson over Rodney Harrison on the cheatsheet. But I understand the reasoning behind the projections that put them there.
OK for starters everyone needs to understand how these "rankings" come to be. Each week I do projections which are fed directly into the rankings program and it spits out a list. What you have to understand is that this leaves no way for me to factor in such important things as confidence in a particular projection or a player's upside potential for that week. This system also creates an even bigger problem in that I must factor in turnovers. If I believe the Bengals will have 3 takeaways in a game I must put those in the projections and award them to someone. Sometimes there are players who have an increased/decreased chance of landing a takeaway or a sack due to match ups, injuries etc, but often turnovers and sometimes even sacks come down to dumb luck and there isn't much for me to go on when projecting them besides a gut feeling. The effect on the other end is that I may be very confident that Rodney Harrison will put up big tackle numbers (9-3-0) but the Steelers don't turn the ball over so I don't project him with a pick. Meanwhile the Vikings have no offense but have been giving the ball away like it's Christmas so I project Jay Bellamy with 4 tackles and a pick. Obviously I would rank Harrison higher if I were putting the list together out of my head and considering all factors, but the program just reads the numbers. Everyone knows that IDP value is based on tackle production and consistency. I STRONGLY suggest that before you guys go ripping on the rankings list, you take time to look at and compare the actual projections. I think you will realize that I'm not as far off the mark as it seems. All this considered I am going to see about adding an actual weekly cheet sheet to my Eyes of the Guru report that is not projections driven. I think everyone will find that to be much more useful in the long run. Hope that clears some muddy water for everyone and thanks for the thoughtful feedback.
Mr. Know-It-All
Footballguy
I love you, man. You are doing a good job. I pride myself in my IDP ability and often use your stuff to take a moment to think if i am overrating a player. So it is a great check on me not getting over confident. If where I have a guy is way different than where you have a guy, I try to break down where I arrived at my projection versus where you did. YOU also have to project not just the guys on your team, but for the entire league...a lot of guys who complain are doing so based on specific guys that they have a vested interest in so their focus is much narrower. Keep up the good work!
Thanks for the props. Its a great feeling to be appreciated.
RestoreTheROAR
Footballguy
I use the rankings as a guideline.Last week (week 2) Troy Polamalu was listed as the #32 DB. You would say wow, he must have a terrible matchup. Well he ended up putting up MONSTER numbers.You have to treat your Defensive studs just like you do your offensive studs (Moss, McCallister, Manning, etc)I dont worry too much about th rankings, i go with my gut. Teams change year to year, new players get schuffled in and out of the offense, injuries can happen (Boller), and each pllayer has a different style of play.Therefore you cant really say, well ___ only scored x amount of points, so Boulware is gonna do the same.Everyone game is different.
I completely agree. I do look at previous matchups as I try to consider every possible factor/source of information to some extent when doing the projections but I don't use them as a "major" factor in my projections considerations. Especially this early in the season when it's too early to pick out strong tendencies
ffchamp1
Footballguy
I am not sure how to say this without offending someone but here goes.Rankings and projections are meant to be a tool for the user. They are one/or more persons opinions based on data. This data, is flawed at this time of the year and I think people lose sight of that. It is only two games of info.
We have played 2 weeks and in those two weeks we have seen players and teams exceed and fall below expectations. You have to adjust, otherwise the game would cease to be any fun.
A stud is a stud is a stud. Just like an offensive player, you should never sit your stud unless he is injured or you have someone equally as good that can fill in.
What John, Aaron and the rest do is meant to be for our enjoyment and as a tool to "support" what we already know. If we base our decision on rankings soley, the season will prove to be long and painstaking.
I read this stuff every week and constantly am amazed at the "variety" in the rankings, but being a realist, I support that they are using there rankings on "current" data.
Someone brought up Rodney Harrison. Well, it appears that SS's do not elevate their games to a higher level when they play the Steelers this year and that Rodney Harrison was extraordinary vs them last yr. However one has to consider MANY other areas before they can consider who to start. Is it apples to apples?
Is Parker the same style runner as Staley and Bettis?
Is Rothlesberger the same passer?
Does the Safety need to support the corners more now that Law is gone and the remaining CB's are banged up?
Do Biesel/Brown need more or less support than Bruschi/Johnson?
How is the 4-3 effecting Harrison as opposed to the 3-4 from last yr?
I appreciate what the staff is doing, but I personally do not take it as the spoken word. I believe that predicting on offensive players success is much more difficult than a defensive player but neither is an exact science.
Pour over the gamebooks, read the local reviews, memorize the injury reports, do not rely on one set of rankings to "set" your lineups, andrefer to your pre-draft rankings but be willing to make changes.
I for one would love to see this forum have a few guys post their own rankings on a weekly basis. I would much rather see that than all the WDIS threads.
Tom
Like I said last week, use these as a guideline. Would you bench RMoss (if you play in a real league)? Just like I would am not benching Troy. Will he have bad games? You bet. But I don't know which ones and neither does Norton...
RestoreTheROAR
Footballguy
I understand it is its week 3 and we've only seen teams play twice, so its hard to evaluate players. Last week, i refused to sit Peppers, because hes just that good. Well he didnt put up big numbers, but he didnt put up TERRIBLE numbers!!! Thats fine, ill take that. Thats the price i have to pay, but one of these times, more often than not, he (along with other studs) will show up in a big way. This week im starting Boulware, whos ranked 40th (i believe) over Gabril Wilson (24th?) because i like what Michael Lewis did against Vick in week 1. Plus Vicks not 100%, so im thinking maybe he will force some stuff. Nonethless, some good stuff has been posted in this thread!
Last edited by a moderator:
Otter
Footballguy
For the record, I don't have a "vested" interest in all the DBs I listed. Like most, I also use these lists as a guide, and never base my starting lineups on the projections. However, a lot of people don't have a lot of experience in IDP leagues and they do rely on these cheatsheets to determine their starters. I feel it is important to voice opinions on whether or not projections are on the money or way off. In this case, I think a lot of the rankings are way off. That's why I put in my .02. Would I start Sheldon Brown over Harrison or Boulware or Wilson? No way. That's why I started this thread. You can call it "ripping" the projections... However, it's just constructive criticism. You should welcome that.
