Who is the most accurate projection Guru of the FBG's (2 Viewers)

[Hersh]

Out of Dodds, Henry, Tremblay and Wood, who do you have the most faith in historically?  I lean toward Dodds with Henry a very close second.

 

[Gottabesweet]

Favorite is Bloom

Least is Wood.

 

[Phil Elliott]

I don't now who is more accurate but they all seem to buy a new Honda every year about this time. Clearance time for current model year. If you do some type of blending you will get a nice average of them all, smoothing out the extremes. 

 

[Army Eye]

Dodds til I die

 

[need2know]

Like them all but tend to agree with Bloom and Dodds the most.  Still disagree sometimes but that's what makes it fun

 

[GibbyGarcia]

I supposed Dodds overall, but I find myself listening to Wood over the years.  Henry is statistically the most accurate I think.

 

[wudaben]

Didn't they say in one of the recent podcasts that Henry was the most accurate?  I have always tended to lean towards Bloom as he seems to be a bit more daring at times.

 

[zoonation]

The "projections" are the most useless tool on this site (which is filled with amazing content).  Hedging a projection based on probability of outcome is effectively useless as a tool to determine which players you should start.  For example, Dodds often has 10-15 WR's within 2 fantasy points of each other.  Not helpful.

 

[Short Corner]

The "projections" are the most useless tool on this site (which is filled with amazing content).  Hedging a projection based on probability of outcome is effectively useless as a tool to determine which players you should start.  For example, Dodds often has 10-15 WR's within 2 fantasy points of each other.  Not helpful.

I don't think I have ever seen DD do this.  6 tops but that is to be expected.  If you want him to give more separation to make your picks easier just ignore the projections and print the cheatsheet.

 

[CentralPA]

Out of Dodds, Henry, Tremblay and Wood, who do you have the most faith in historically?  I lean toward Dodds with Henry a very close second.

I 2nd this.  Sometimes I'll take Bloom's advice but mainly it's Dodds/Tremblay.

Wood, while a fellow Eagles fan, I disagree with a lot.

 

[Bronco Billy]

I 2nd this.  Sometimes I'll take Bloom's advice but mainly it's Dodds/Tremblay.

Wood, while a fellow Eagles fan, I disagree with a lot.

I think most people agree that Eagles fans are disagreeable.

 

[NYRAGE]

I don't think I have ever seen DD do this.  6 tops but that is to be expected.  If you want him to give more separation to make your picks easier just ignore the projections and print the cheatsheet.

Depends how far down you look. Once you reach a certain point, there can be tons of guys within a point or two     .e.g  There are 16 WRs after Crabtree within 2 points.

Personally, I have never liked the weekly projections here. At least Bloom adds some comments. I gave this feedback after last season. A site like the Fantasy Guru will have a small paragraph on each player in their rankings. It's far more helpful than the just the rankings here.

 

[zoonation]

I don't think I have ever seen DD do this.  6 tops but that is to be expected.  If you want him to give more separation to make your picks easier just ignore the projections and print the cheatsheet.

I don't go based on the rankings or projections.   I like to read the matchup content and then go with my gut.   

The rankings are equally useless.  Even if they are close (say he has shady at rb6 one week and he ends up rb7) it doesn't help if the actual rb6 is a guy you would have otherwise started.  

In other words, it is an impossible exercise the efficacy of which is impossible to prove or rely on.  

The problem is that it is marketed as a tool to help you choose one player over another.  But it is complete guesswork and nonsense, really. 

 

[zoonation]

I don't think I have ever seen DD do this.  6 tops but that is to be expected.  If you want him to give more separation to make your picks easier just ignore the projections and print the cheatsheet.

This week Dez projected at #4 with 10.7 points (standard scoring)

Keenan Allen is at #21 with 8.7 points projected.  

17 guys within 2 fantasy points of one another.  

I'm not saying the methodology is wrong, I'm just saying it is useless. 

 

[Dope]

I like using the projections as a gauge. I put in my scoring system and see whether my lineup will win or the other guy.

Surprisingly, using this has been pretty accurate at predicting the games ive been in. I'd say it's about 75-80%.

I use Dodds primarily, but also look at Henry and Bloom. Bloom is definitely more aggressive.

 

[bmsarvis]

I like dodds fair enough but I usually side with bloom more

 

[ourmanflint]

I like using the projections as a gauge. I put in my scoring system and see whether my lineup will win or the other guy.

Surprisingly, using this has been pretty accurate at predicting the games ive been in. I'd say it's about 75-80%.

I use Dodds primarily, but also look at Henry and Bloom. Bloom is definitely more aggressive.

Henry doesn't do weekly and Bloom doesn't do pre-season so what are we talking about here?

 

[zoonation]

Bloom's tier analysis is far more useful as a tool when deciding who to start.  

 

[psychobillies]

I go with whichever one agrees with me.  It varies at each position.  If none of them agree, I just wonder what the hell is the matter with them.

 

[Stompin' Tom Connors]

Dodds. Consistent and dependable.

Bloom, to me, brings credible counterpoints and rankings, and his explanations make sense. Provides a good "look up" moment for me to ensure I am critically thinking through matchup and opportunity and not jsut blindly following rankings.

Always love me some Maurile, despite him being a Chargers fan. But his rankings to me have often been a tad reactive with calls that seem a little too bold for me. 

Love that so many of the FBGs provide their views -- the more, the merrier.

 

[Pigskin Fanatic]

Dodds. Consistent and dependable.

Bloom, to me, brings credible counterpoints and rankings, and his explanations make sense. Provides a good "look up" moment for me to ensure I am critically thinking through matchup and opportunity and not jsut blindly following rankings.

Always love me some Maurile, despite him being a Chargers fan. But his rankings to me have often been a tad reactive with calls that seem a little too bold for me. 

Love that so many of the FBGs provide their views -- the more, the merrier.

I feel the same way. From my experience, Dodds' projections are consistent throughout the season and changes the least based on situational changes week to week. Maurile seems to be the opposite extreme, relatively speaking within the group anyway. Since Bloom is on the Podcast, he gets to explain his picks and thoughts and that lends to his credibility. So I go with his picks a lot when it's different than the others.

 

[matuski]

I like the red crystal ball better.  Historically speaking.

 

[daveR]

Otis, followed closely by SWC 

 

[pbandy1]

Projections wise Henry is my man (also a fan of John Paulsen from 4for4). For other general football rankings, knowledge and good calls Bloom is the shiz. Also good is Jake Ciely. 

 

[beerbuff]

While no rankings in 2016 for these guys according the rankings at Fantasy Pros https://www.fantasypros.com/nfl/accuracy/2009-2015.php this is how a few of the footballguys ranked in earlier years out of roughly 100 'experts'.

Dodds  2015-25th  2014-42nd  2013-9th  2012 5th

Bloom                   2014 46th   2013-50th  2012-53rd

Trembley               2014 18th   2013-33rd   

 

[Short Corner]

This week Dez projected at #4 with 10.7 points (standard scoring)

Keenan Allen is at #21 with 8.7 points projected.  

17 guys within 2 fantasy points of one another.  

I'm not saying the methodology is wrong, I'm just saying it is useless. 

I thought the thread was referring to season long projections.  In a given weak, once you get pastthe multiple td scorers, there is going to be a jumbling of guys