Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Dynasty Rankings


Recommended Posts

And there are also a lot of people who said Kobe and Lebron would be all-time greats after seeing them play as rookies... and they're maybe not so far off there. Just saying.

Kobe looked awful his first season. He was drafted 16th (I think). I don't think anyone was calling him a future all-time great.But, I do get your point and will note it is valid. Just as many fans were claiming Damon Staudamire, Tyreke Evans, Elton Brand, and plenty of other players with good rookie seasons, were going to be great. If we want to use basketball, plenty were claiming Tyreke Evans and Brandon Jennings were going to be special after great rookie seasons. Not even a year later and they came tumbling back down to earth, due to no fault of their own. Their games were NBAready, but that doesn't always translate to elite careers. If fact, in rarely ever does. If you want to use football, Ryan and Flacco are two great examples of this happening. Ryan was a flashy top 5 dynasty QB not too long ago. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what separated guys like lebron and kobe as rookies, from players like brandon roy, drose, amare, melo etc. guys that played similarly well as rookies and will certainly have great careers, many all star games, potential hof births but no chance at all time great status.

That is not true at all. Kobe and Durant did not look great as rookies. Durant put up points, but was not efficient. Kobe didn't put up points and was not efficient. Melo had a much better rookie season, and still might be the better player than Durant. Derrick Rose is on a Kevin Durant like pace and also had a better rookie season than Durant. Saying he has no chance to be an all time great is just wrong. He is scoring 24 points , dishing out 8 assists and taking in 5 rebounds a game. All in his 3rd season. Have you watched him play?It is easy to sit here and say you only have to watch them play to know they will be great, but that is not the case at all. Based on rookie seasons, Damon Stautamire would be doing what Kobe is right now, and Kobe would be a role player. And, just to make my point: Derek Rose looked like a good player his rookie season, an All-Star his second season, because he added a mid-range jumper over the summer. Now he looks like a top 3 PG (already) because his defense has taken a huge step, and he is now shooting 40% from downtown (up from 26%) all in one summer. Having a good rookie season did not make Rose a top 5 MVP candidate, his major improvements did. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

agree with concept coup. drastic hindsight bias is occurring wrt to the nba tangent. i remember after lebrons rookie year pundits were split on if they would prefer wade or melo to lebron and very few thought he would turn out this good.

all time greats are rarely predicted in advance. the jump to get there is just monstrous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

and what separated guys like lebron and kobe as rookies, from players like brandon roy, drose, amare, melo etc. guys that played similarly well as rookies and will certainly have great careers, many all star games, potential hof births but no chance at all time great status.currently, where does john wall and blake griffin and westbrook and durant project? they are playing fantastic, as good, if not better than kobe/lebron as youngsters, and have ridiculous physical tools. they could become all time greats, but they are still pretty large dogs to achieve it. they are huge favorites to be perennial top 10 players and all stars though.lots of players have played very well as youngsters and rookies, and had great careers, only a few have become manning marino brady elway etc.

What seperates Lebron and Kobe (and I believe Durant) is that people watched them play. Until you actually start doing that and stop using stat analysis of a 23 year old rookie QB as your sole basis for evaluation, nobody in this thread will take your opinions seriously. There is more to any game than just stats, and players like LeBron, Kobe, Bradford, etc just jump off the TV when you are watching. If you choose not to watch, then you will never get it.
my point, from a stat perspective, is that just bc a player shows unique ability and plays well at an early age, it is ridiculous to project him to be an all time great, mainly bc of the miniscule percentage of players that reach that level.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there are also a lot of people who said Kobe and Lebron would be all-time greats after seeing them play as rookies... and they're maybe not so far off there. Just saying.

Kobe looked awful his first season. He was drafted 16th (I think). I don't think anyone was calling him a future all-time great.

But, I do get your point and will note it is valid. Just as many fans were claiming Damon Staudamire, Tyreke Evans, Elton Brand, and plenty of other players with good rookie seasons, were going to be great.

If we want to use basketball, plenty were claiming Tyreke Evans and Brandon Jennings were going to be special after great rookie seasons. Not even a year later and they came tumbling back down to earth, due to no fault of their own. Their games were NBAready, but that doesn't always translate to elite careers. If fact, in rarely ever does.

If you want to use football, Ryan and Flacco are two great examples of this happening. Ryan was a flashy top 5 dynasty QB not too long ago.

Just want to make the point that Evans is battling plantar faciatis and has not been healthy this year. He's battled through, but he isn't moving as well as last year. His 2nd season has been a big let down, but is more injury driven, imo. -I think when analyzing players, you have to look at reasons why their numbers dip and make a decision if this is something that can be corrected. Sometimes a nagging injury causes the drop off and a player is able to get past it in the offseason and bounce right back the following year... whether we're talking about a RB or an NBA player.

ETA: I do definitely agree that players in various sports that have very good to great rookie seasons are not necessarily going to end up being great or one of the all time greats. There are huge strides that get you from the former to the latter. (particularly with a position like QB)

Edited by mlball77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just want to make the point that Evans is battling plantar faciatis and has not been healthy this year. He's battled through, but he isn't moving as well as last year. His 2nd season has been a big let down, but is more injury driven, imo. -I think when analyzing players, you have to look at reasons why their numbers dip and make a decision if this is something that can be corrected. Sometimes a nagging injury causes the drop off and a player is able to get past it in the offseason and bounce right back the following year... whether we're talking about a RB or an NBA player.

I was aware of that. But his shot selection (shot in general) and other aspects of his game have been questioned as well. I hope he has the procedure and comes back healthy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And there are also a lot of people who said Kobe and Lebron would be all-time greats after seeing them play as rookies... and they're maybe not so far off there. Just saying.

Kobe looked awful his first season. He was drafted 16th (I think). I don't think anyone was calling him a future all-time great.

But, I do get your point and will note it is valid. Just as many fans were claiming Damon Staudamire, Tyreke Evans, Elton Brand, and plenty of other players with good rookie seasons, were going to be great.

If we want to use basketball, plenty were claiming Tyreke Evans and Brandon Jennings were going to be special after great rookie seasons. Not even a year later and they came tumbling back down to earth, due to no fault of their own. Their games were NBAready, but that doesn't always translate to elite careers. If fact, in rarely ever does.

If you want to use football, Ryan and Flacco are two great examples of this happening. Ryan was a flashy top 5 dynasty QB not too long ago.

Just want to make the point that Evans is battling plantar faciatis and has not been healthy this year. He's battled through, but he isn't moving as well as last year. His 2nd season has been a big let down, but is more injury driven, imo. -I think when analyzing players, you have to look at reasons why their numbers dip and make a decision if this is something that can be corrected. Sometimes a nagging injury causes the drop off and a player is able to get past it in the offseason and bounce right back the following year... whether we're talking about a RB or an NBA player.

excellent post . . .

I am not an Evans fan (at all) but everytime the announcers say he's having a subpar 2nd year I yell at the screen "he's HURT" so they need to quit repeating that . . .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

agree with concept coup. drastic hindsight bias is occurring wrt to the nba tangent. i remember after lebrons rookie year pundits were split on if they would prefer wade or melo to lebron and very few thought he would turn out this good.all time greats are rarely predicted in advance. the jump to get there is just monstrous.

but on a fantasy board that jump is only a few clicks away . . .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what separated guys like lebron and kobe as rookies, from players like brandon roy, drose, amare, melo etc. guys that played similarly well as rookies and will certainly have great careers, many all star games, potential hof births but no chance at all time great status.

That is not true at all. Kobe and Durant did not look great as rookies. Durant put up points, but was not efficient. Kobe didn't put up points and was not efficient. Melo had a much better rookie season, and still might be the better player than Durant. Derrick Rose is on a Kevin Durant like pace and also had a better rookie season than Durant. Saying he has no chance to be an all time great is just wrong. He is scoring 24 points , dishing out 8 assists and taking in 5 rebounds a game. All in his 3rd season. Have you watched him play?It is easy to sit here and say you only have to watch them play to know they will be great, but that is not the case at all. Based on rookie seasons, Damon Stautamire would be doing what Kobe is right now, and Kobe would be a role player. And, just to make my point: Derek Rose looked like a good player his rookie season, an All-Star his second season, because he added a mid-range jumper over the summer. Now he looks like a top 3 PG (already) because his defense has taken a huge step, and he is now shooting 40% from downtown (up from 26%) all in one summer. Having a good rookie season did not make Rose a top 5 MVP candidate, his major improvements did.
That quote was not said by me
Link to comment
Share on other sites

what separated guys like lebron and kobe as rookies, from players like brandon roy, drose, amare, melo etc. guys that played similarly well as rookies and will certainly have great careers, many all star games, potential hof births but no chance at all time great status.

That is not true at all. Kobe and Durant did not look great as rookies. Durant put up points, but was not efficient. Kobe didn't put up points and was not efficient. Melo had a much better rookie season, and still might be the better player than Durant. Derrick Rose is on a Kevin Durant like pace and also had a better rookie season than Durant. Saying he has no chance to be an all time great is just wrong. He is scoring 24 points , dishing out 8 assists and taking in 5 rebounds a game. All in his 3rd season. Have you watched him play?It is easy to sit here and say you only have to watch them play to know they will be great, but that is not the case at all. Based on rookie seasons, Damon Stautamire would be doing what Kobe is right now, and Kobe would be a role player. And, just to make my point: Derek Rose looked like a good player his rookie season, an All-Star his second season, because he added a mid-range jumper over the summer. Now he looks like a top 3 PG (already) because his defense has taken a huge step, and he is now shooting 40% from downtown (up from 26%) all in one summer. Having a good rookie season did not make Rose a top 5 MVP candidate, his major improvements did.
That quote was not said by me
Sorry, mate. Looks like I missunderstood the quote too. I think the author and I agree, for the most part. I'll take your name out now.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Schaub is the 12th QB in NFL HISTORY to have back-to-back 4,000 yard seasons. AJ's TDs were down this year, I think because of injury. But he is one of the best scoring WRs in the NFL. Please help me understand why Schaub will continue to finish around 7-12. What about Freeman suggests that he will score higher than Schaub? I think people see the number 22 and fall in love. Not all 2nd year QBs who show promise improve on their numbers much after that. It wasn't long ago that Matt Ryan was talked about as a top 5 dynasty QB.

I don't see anything special when I watch Schaub or Ryan, but I do when I watch Freeman. You can focus on stats if you want - dynasty needs people with varying philosophies. I prefer focusing on what I see, which is why I and guys like F&L had Foster on our rosters before this season. I've seen this argument hashed out a million times in this thread and won't be a part of it. Let's agree to disagree.
What is special about him? I am not asking to be an antagonist - honest question. Maybe you can point out what I should be looking for next time I watch him play.
He has eyes in the back of his head much like Rodgers, Roethlisberger, Brees, Romo. I firmly believe that's something you either have or you don't and you can't learn it. As soon as I see a guy has that ability, my dynasty alarm starts blaring. Aside from that, he goes through all of his reads even when he's on the run. He's accurate. He's cool under pressure. He gets the pass out quick when needed. He rises to the occasion instead of shrinking from it. Basically everything I would want in an NFL QB, and typically great NFL QBs become great fantasy QBs. I won't be shocked if he never finishes top 5, but unlike some others here I won't be shocked if he does. Guess that's the key difference.
He is similar to a young Roethlisburger, Big strong, mobile with a gun. Doesn't usually throw 30+ times a game, but has been amazingly consistent. That and not only is he 1 step up from being a rookie (and made big strides this year), but every skill position in tamp (save TE) has a rookie starter and they are on the verge of being in the playoffs THIS year. This team and this guy has nowhere to go but up. I wouldn't trade freeman for Cassel, Eli, cutler or anyone that isn't already an elite tire qb :shrug:Like Valhallan says, watch some tape on this guy. Admittedly I am 'biased' as I owned him this year (in a redraft league though), almsot picked him up in my keeper league, but already had vick, aaron rogers and cutler. In retrospect waited to long to dump cutler, but since I already keep vick at 16 round value I focused on rb/wr/te prospects (like armstrong, alexander, graham, BJGE)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rather than argue for or against Freeman, I'll just say that if you value Freeman anywhere close to what you posted, you should be buying him. His price isn't nearly that IMO.

My biggest issue with what you have is Rivers. I can't imagine anyone would trade him for Freeman, Bradford, Manning or Luck.

My main question was around Freeman. I have him as a huge ?, but he represents lots of potential long term value. Moreso perhaps than any QB younger than 30. I'm just trying to peg him somewhere in the mix to see what it might take value wise to get him (i.e. Rivers + X) or (Rodgers - X) type deal and see how I feel about that.

The other guys I'm fairly comfortable with where I have them. Swapping Rivers for Freeman in that list probably seems the consensus of the responders here.

I don't want to just hijack this into a Romo debate, but I feel pretty confident the next coach will not stat pad like Garrett. I just don't see long term upside.

I like Freeman - a lot - but I wouldn't put him nearly that high and certainly behind Rivers as others have suggested. I think Rivers is probably top 3-4. In any case, if you were moving Rodgers and Rivers in a deal for Freeman, you can likely get a lot back.

Also don't understand that second comment about "stat padding". Romo finished QB2 in Garrett's first year as OC (and Romo's first year starting). Are you suggesting that all of his success to this point was just "padding stats"? Are we just going to ignore all the talent around him as well?

stat padding??? this young offense grinded it out, occasionally throwing, and took the air out of the ball. If anything they stat sandbagged vs the talent on this offense.

I would honestly love a deal in which I gave up rivers to get back something like freeman and a BJGE/spiller/deangelo etc back as well due to the inflated value of rivers. That running game is gonna be a lot better when matthews is healthy, and I have to wonder if SD will duplicate the same astronmoical levels of points next year. Plus, every team (and especially every defense) in the AFC west is young and going to be better next year IMO.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, why are you even debating this if you outright refuse to even watch Bradford play? He's a stud. Pure and simple. I think he'll be better than Manning (barring injury). If he proves to have elite durability (still very much up in the air), I think he has the physical and mental tools to be the greatest (statistical) QB to play the game. That is how good he looks.

WOW. This is just silly. Manning is one of the top 3-5 QBs ever. The best in the last decade plus. Sam Bradford is having a good year, but spare us the hype job. The best QB ever?
He might be overdoing it a bit, but Bradford in the most poised, accurate rookie QB i have ever seen, including Manning. Im not saying he will be as good as Manning, but if that can be said about any rookie QB it is Bradford.It is scary to think of what this guy might do as he matures and gets some real WR's. Getting to play his career in a dome in the NFC West isnt going to hurt either. I know the division isnt alway going to suck, but thats alot of nice weather games.They guy was thrown to the wolves on the worst franchise over the last few years, lost all his starting WR's to injury in the begining of the year, and has lead his team the the playoffs. Mark it down now, this guy is going to be one of the NFL best QB's over the next 10 years.
There is a difference between being NFL-ready and being great. There is a difference between having a great rookie season and being great. Not every young player continues to improve at the same rate. Pretending that Bradford has shown enough in one season (average, by NFL standards (not just rookies)) to suggest he is the best ever is silly. I don't see how an argument can be made suggesting otherwise. A lot of QBs have had better first seasons than Peyton Manning, statistically and in wins. But since maybe Marino, there has only been one Petyton Manning.
A lot of people forget that not only do you have a year to gow, but now nfl DC's have a year of tape on you. Not everyone can get past their own instincts and tendencies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, why are you even debating this if you outright refuse to even watch Bradford play? He's a stud. Pure and simple. I think he'll be better than Manning (barring injury). If he proves to have elite durability (still very much up in the air), I think he has the physical and mental tools to be the greatest (statistical) QB to play the game. That is how good he looks.

WOW. This is just silly. Manning is one of the top 3-5 QBs ever. The best in the last decade plus. Sam Bradford is having a good year, but spare us the hype job. The best QB ever?
He might be overdoing it a bit, but Bradford in the most poised, accurate rookie QB i have ever seen, including Manning. Im not saying he will be as good as Manning, but if that can be said about any rookie QB it is Bradford.It is scary to think of what this guy might do as he matures and gets some real WR's. Getting to play his career in a dome in the NFC West isnt going to hurt either. I know the division isnt alway going to suck, but thats alot of nice weather games.They guy was thrown to the wolves on the worst franchise over the last few years, lost all his starting WR's to injury in the begining of the year, and has lead his team the the playoffs. Mark it down now, this guy is going to be one of the NFL best QB's over the next 10 years.
There is a difference between being NFL-ready and being great. There is a difference between having a great rookie season and being great. Not every young player continues to improve at the same rate. Pretending that Bradford has shown enough in one season (average, by NFL standards (not just rookies)) to suggest he is the best ever is silly. I don't see how an argument can be made suggesting otherwise. A lot of QBs have had better first seasons than Peyton Manning, statistically and in wins. But since maybe Marino, there has only been one Petyton Manning.
A lot of people forget that not only do you have a year to gow, but now nfl DC's have a year of tape on you. Not everyone can get past their own instincts and tendencies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please have mercy on us poor saps that don't know squat about the NBA.

The NBA is a shadow if its former self, a very painful sport to watch and not what I want to see discussed in a Dynasty Football thread. Please take further posts to a different location.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would honestly love a deal in which I gave up rivers to get back something like freeman and a BJGE/spiller/deangelo etc back as well due to the inflated value of rivers. That running game is gonna be a lot better when matthews is healthy, and I have to wonder if SD will duplicate the same astronmoical levels of points next year. Plus, every team (and especially every defense) in the AFC west is young and going to be better next year IMO.

If you made a deal like this, you would be giving up the best player in the deal. IMO these kinds of trades rarely work out well, unless your team is bad enough that quantity trumps quality. I happen to own Freeman and Deangelo in one dynasty league, and I would trade both of them for Rivers without hesitation.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would honestly love a deal in which I gave up rivers to get back something like freeman and a BJGE/spiller/deangelo etc back as well due to the inflated value of rivers. That running game is gonna be a lot better when matthews is healthy, and I have to wonder if SD will duplicate the same astronmoical levels of points next year. Plus, every team (and especially every defense) in the AFC west is young and going to be better next year IMO.

If you made a deal like this, you would be giving up the best player in the deal. IMO these kinds of trades rarely work out well, unless your team is bad enough that quantity trumps quality. I happen to own Freeman and Deangelo in one dynasty league, and I would trade both of them for Rivers without hesitation.
:lmao: There's a big difference between being a good NFL quarterback and a dominant quarterback in fantasy football. Rivers doesn't need to make any jump in production or get better weapons or get a different head coach to throw the ball endlessly and rack up numbers. He is already dominant. Freeman may or may not be. So far guys like Freeman, Bradford and Ryan look like good NFL quarterbacks, but I don't really see any reason for either guy to start chucking the ball and piling up stats, and even if they did have to, I don't really see the weapons available for them to do it consistently.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So far guys like Freeman, Bradford and Ryan look like good NFL quarterbacks, but I don't really see any reason for either guy to start chucking the ball and piling up stats, and even if they did have to, I don't really see the weapons available for them to do it consistently.

Bradford is on pace for 590 attempts. Peyton has only had more than 590 attempts twice is his career (591 in 2002 and now on pace to break 650 this year). He's chucking the ball, it's just to a bunch of guys who have no business starting and SJax.Ryan could have a lot more attempts next year if Turner looks another year older. He is already starting to decline. Also, a lot of mocks have them taking a WR, which could improve the pass offense as Jenkins and Douglas added little this year. Of course Gonzalez may retire too; considering the team will be a SB contender again, I'm betting he doesn't.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would honestly love a deal in which I gave up rivers to get back something like freeman and a BJGE/spiller/deangelo etc back as well due to the inflated value of rivers. That running game is gonna be a lot better when matthews is healthy, and I have to wonder if SD will duplicate the same astronmoical levels of points next year. Plus, every team (and especially every defense) in the AFC west is young and going to be better next year IMO.

If you made a deal like this, you would be giving up the best player in the deal. IMO these kinds of trades rarely work out well, unless your team is bad enough that quantity trumps quality. I happen to own Freeman and Deangelo in one dynasty league, and I would trade both of them for Rivers without hesitation.
And even then, it might be a short term fix that will come back to haunt you for years to come. If you are trading an elite, top tier player at any position, to come out even in a multi-player swap for that player you must be 1) a very good judge of talent and 2) lucky. It is very risky to give up a known quantity for some lesser and/or unproven players. From my experience, it doesn't usually work out, it is better to keep that player and build the team around him (even if he is your only asset). It won't be a quick fix, but the long term results will probably be better IMO. Edited by squistion
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am beginning the long process of making some preliminary rankings for 2011 and beyond (keeper/dynasty values) and wondering what other dynasty/keeper/even redraft owners are factoring into their cheatsheats. Probably the best question for a stats guy like myself, but looking for other owners perspectives. Here's what I have in my rough draft so far.....

QBs - 40% talent

20% 2010 production (whatever you want to factor into that)

10% age (years before the physical fall occurs typically)

8% injury risk (just for the injury prone or those with a history or the scrambler that don't always slide for examples)

7% WR/TE weapons

7% Off.Line play - pass blocking

5% Ability to gain FF pts. rushing

3% RB weapons.

RBs - 50% Talent

15% 2010 Stats

15% Off. Line play - run blocking

10% Overall Wear/Tear of career (# of touches)

10% Age Factor

10% Injury Risk/History

10% Odds/Opportunity of being a "Bell Cow" running back

I am still working on an early spreadsheet for WR and TE, but what does everyone think of the QB and RB breakdown?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am beginning the long process of making some preliminary rankings for 2011 and beyond (keeper/dynasty values) and wondering what other dynasty/keeper/even redraft owners are factoring into their cheatsheats. Probably the best question for a stats guy like myself, but looking for other owners perspectives. Here's what I have in my rough draft so far.....QBs - 40% talent 20% 2010 production (whatever you want to factor into that) 10% age (years before the physical fall occurs typically) 8% injury risk (just for the injury prone or those with a history or the scrambler that don't always slide for examples) 7% WR/TE weapons 7% Off.Line play - pass blocking 5% Ability to gain FF pts. rushing 3% RB weapons.RBs - 50% Talent 15% 2010 Stats 15% Off. Line play - run blocking 10% Overall Wear/Tear of career (# of touches) 10% Age Factor 10% Injury Risk/History 10% Odds/Opportunity of being a "Bell Cow" running backI am still working on an early spreadsheet for WR and TE, but what does everyone think of the QB and RB breakdown?

IMO all that is way too much. All I do is say to myself if I had the 1st pick of a startup who would I take. Then who would I take next, etc.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, my rankings for 2010 were based on projections alone (draft/projections dominators). I find that to have many faults to it because one doesn't totally follow VBD or anything like that during the draft exactly anyway. This will be just a model and I will keep my original (who would I pick 1st, 2nd, etc.) rankings and compare them, maybe even average them at the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please have mercy on us poor saps that don't know squat about the NBA.

The NBA is a shadow if its former self, a very painful sport to watch and not what I want to see discussed in a Dynasty Football thread. Please take further posts to a different location.
now this a post that is a post that has potential to really open up a can of worms.point is, not every young player becomes an all time great. next time ill use hockey players.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a numbers guy more than a feelings guy (I do have thoughts about players that don't involve stats, etc. that influence drafting, free agent pickups), so that is always where I start and gravitate towards. Feelings are in those stats - the "talent", risk and bell cow numbers are my impressions, not from a stats website....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am beginning the long process of making some preliminary rankings for 2011 and beyond (keeper/dynasty values) and wondering what other dynasty/keeper/even redraft owners are factoring into their cheatsheats. Probably the best question for a stats guy like myself, but looking for other owners perspectives. Here's what I have in my rough draft so far.....QBs - 40% talent 20% 2010 production (whatever you want to factor into that) 10% age (years before the physical fall occurs typically) 8% injury risk (just for the injury prone or those with a history or the scrambler that don't always slide for examples) 7% WR/TE weapons 7% Off.Line play - pass blocking 5% Ability to gain FF pts. rushing 3% RB weapons.RBs - 50% Talent 15% 2010 Stats 15% Off. Line play - run blocking 10% Overall Wear/Tear of career (# of touches) 10% Age Factor 10% Injury Risk/History 10% Odds/Opportunity of being a "Bell Cow" running backI am still working on an early spreadsheet for WR and TE, but what does everyone think of the QB and RB breakdown?

How exactly do you quantify talent??? That calculation would be very helpful as i got my appraisal at work coming up next month & I'm like the Calvin Johnson of desk jockies!!! :rant:
Link to comment
Share on other sites

IMO all that is way too much. All I do is say to myself if I had the 1st pick of a startup who would I take. Then who would I take next, etc.

:rant: Me too.But I am interested to see what you come up with after you crunch the numbers, fdc. Just from looking at the list, the "bell cow" percentage seems to be really low. I would also value a QBs weapons more than 7%. Look what weapons did for Mike Vike. Edited by Concept Coop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am beginning the long process of making some preliminary rankings for 2011 and beyond (keeper/dynasty values) and wondering what other dynasty/keeper/even redraft owners are factoring into their cheatsheats. Probably the best question for a stats guy like myself, but looking for other owners perspectives. Here's what I have in my rough draft so far.....QBs - 40% talent20% 2010 production (whatever you want to factor into that)10% age (years before the physical fall occurs typically)8% injury risk (just for the injury prone or those with a history or the scrambler that don't always slide for examples)7% WR/TE weapons7% Off.Line play - pass blocking5% Ability to gain FF pts. rushing3% RB weapons.RBs - 50% Talent15% 2010 Stats15% Off. Line play - run blocking10% Overall Wear/Tear of career (# of touches)10% Age Factor10% Injury Risk/History10% Odds/Opportunity of being a "Bell Cow" running backI am still working on an early spreadsheet for WR and TE, but what does everyone think of the QB and RB breakdown?

I would say a QB's receivers are more important than their injury risk. While guys like Vick and odgers are more likely to get hurt than Peyton and Brees, it is still fluky. I would rather my QB's have good WR's and TE's to throw to than a slightly less chance of getting hurt.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am beginning the long process of making some preliminary rankings for 2011 and beyond (keeper/dynasty values) and wondering what other dynasty/keeper/even redraft owners are factoring into their cheatsheats. Probably the best question for a stats guy like myself, but looking for other owners perspectives. Here's what I have in my rough draft so far.....QBs - 40% talent20% 2010 production (whatever you want to factor into that)10% age (years before the physical fall occurs typically)8% injury risk (just for the injury prone or those with a history or the scrambler that don't always slide for examples)7% WR/TE weapons7% Off.Line play - pass blocking5% Ability to gain FF pts. rushing3% RB weapons.RBs - 50% Talent15% 2010 Stats15% Off. Line play - run blocking10% Overall Wear/Tear of career (# of touches)10% Age Factor10% Injury Risk/History10% Odds/Opportunity of being a "Bell Cow" running backI am still working on an early spreadsheet for WR and TE, but what does everyone think of the QB and RB breakdown?

I would say a QB's receivers are more important than their injury risk. While guys like Vick and odgers are more likely to get hurt than Peyton and Brees, it is still fluky. I would rather my QB's have good WR's and TE's to throw to than a slightly less chance of getting hurt.
Thanks for all the imput so far.I just put early numbers down.....I agree with all the imput so far.In regard to the "talent" question....all the categories I do on a 1-5 scale (highest is optimal), so an RB with a talent of 5 is an elite top talent. 2.5 would be an average NFL talent at the position, etc. I agree that a QB's weapons should be more of an influence...thanks.I will share some of the results along the way as some of the findings are different from my rankings - more things to consider!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished up the RB rankings (as of now, obviously off-season moves can shift things a little + rookies). They are ranked based on:

Talent 40%

O-line 5% (this can change as well depending on stability of the lineup from 2010, additions, departures, etc.)

Rushing 9% (metrics to account for production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)

Receiving 3% (metrics of production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)

Wear/Tear 10% (overall load of their touches in NFL career)

Age 10% (based on the shelf life of running backs)

Injury Risk 3% (wanted it to be a factor, but not one to skew the rankings very much as injuries are definitely unpredictable)

Bell Cow 20% (odds that they will be a full-time starter like ADP as an example has a score of 5.0, while R.Bush has a score of 1.0 as I never see him being a bell cow).

All categories are 1-5 on a sliding scale within the category, so 5.0 would be a perfect score.

Here is the top 5 based on that breakdown....

Charles - 4.79

Foster - 4.57

McFadden-4.53

Stewart - 4.40

ADP - 4.38

ADP is in the #5 spot because he has more wear and tear than the others, the top 3 have the edge in REC metrics and all have him in age. The top 2 have a better O-line as well. Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biggest movers from my original list (who I would pick mentality only) to the number-crunching are:

Risers:

Felix Jones up 10 spots

B.Wells up 8 spots

R.Jennings up 22 spots

P.Thomas up 10 spots

B-G-Ellis up 19 spots

Fallers:

Jacobs down 19 spots

F.Jackson down 15 spots

D.Brown down 13 spots

Forte down 13 spots

Best down 9 spots

Gore down 9 spots

C.Johnson down 6 spots.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished up the RB rankings (as of now, obviously off-season moves can shift things a little + rookies). They are ranked based on:Talent 40%O-line 5% (this can change as well depending on stability of the lineup from 2010, additions, departures, etc.)Rushing 9% (metrics to account for production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)Receiving 3% (metrics of production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)Wear/Tear 10% (overall load of their touches in NFL career)Age 10% (based on the shelf life of running backs)Injury Risk 3% (wanted it to be a factor, but not one to skew the rankings very much as injuries are definitely unpredictable)Bell Cow 20% (odds that they will be a full-time starter like ADP as an example has a score of 5.0, while R.Bush has a score of 1.0 as I never see him being a bell cow).All categories are 1-5 on a sliding scale within the category, so 5.0 would be a perfect score.Here is the top 5 based on that breakdown....Charles - 4.79Foster - 4.57McFadden-4.53Stewart - 4.40ADP - 4.38ADP is in the #5 spot because he has more wear and tear than the others, the top 3 have the edge in REC metrics and all have him in age. The top 2 have a better O-line as well. Thoughts?

I think talent should be a bigger percentage. No way should Chris Johnson not end up in the top 5 of any RB rankings. Nor should Foster be ahead of Peterson, even if you are a big Foster fan. I love Jamaal Charles, but based on his usage, he shouldnt have that high of a score. Not a bad effort though, im just not sure there is an accurate way of doing what you are doing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adjusted Talent to 50%, now ADP falls in at #5. He has a lot more career carries than I thought, that plus his supporting cast needs work. Gore hasn't had a decent chance to have consistent holes without a QB - now Peterson could fall into that camp in 2011....

A couple points... Is it number of carries or age you are more concerned with? And, Peterson seemed to do fine with no help at QB before Favre arrived... although I think the Minny line was better back then, IIRC. I think Peterson at 5 is still too low, imo, but I dig what you're doing. I've tinkered around with similar things (numerical weighted player ratings) but always seem to scrap it because I can't get anything to pass the sniff test. Edited by mlball77
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am beginning the long process of making some preliminary rankings for 2011 and beyond (keeper/dynasty values) and wondering what other dynasty/keeper/even redraft owners are factoring into their cheatsheats. Probably the best question for a stats guy like myself, but looking for other owners perspectives. Here's what I have in my rough draft so far.....QBs - 40% talent20% 2010 production (whatever you want to factor into that)10% age (years before the physical fall occurs typically)8% injury risk (just for the injury prone or those with a history or the scrambler that don't always slide for examples)7% WR/TE weapons7% Off.Line play - pass blocking5% Ability to gain FF pts. rushing3% RB weapons.RBs - 50% Talent15% 2010 Stats15% Off. Line play - run blocking10% Overall Wear/Tear of career (# of touches)10% Age Factor10% Injury Risk/History10% Odds/Opportunity of being a "Bell Cow" running backI am still working on an early spreadsheet for WR and TE, but what does everyone think of the QB and RB breakdown?

I would say a QB's receivers are more important than their injury risk. While guys like Vick and odgers are more likely to get hurt than Peyton and Brees, it is still fluky. I would rather my QB's have good WR's and TE's to throw to than a slightly less chance of getting hurt.
I agree. Injury risk is hard to quantify because in fact almost all QBs will be hurt at some point. I think there may have been only two QBs who started every game for their team--Brees and Bradford. Injuries are harder to predict than just --this guy runs or this guy doesn't slide. I think you have age wrong too--you have the same factor for QBs as for RBs. But QBs can play into their late 30s very effectively. WRs can play into mid 30s. And RBs rarely produce well beyond 30.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am beginning the long process of making some preliminary rankings for 2011 and beyond (keeper/dynasty values) and wondering what other dynasty/keeper/even redraft owners are factoring into their cheatsheats. Probably the best question for a stats guy like myself, but looking for other owners perspectives. Here's what I have in my rough draft so far.....QBs - 40% talent20% 2010 production (whatever you want to factor into that)10% age (years before the physical fall occurs typically)8% injury risk (just for the injury prone or those with a history or the scrambler that don't always slide for examples)7% WR/TE weapons7% Off.Line play - pass blocking5% Ability to gain FF pts. rushing3% RB weapons.RBs - 50% Talent15% 2010 Stats15% Off. Line play - run blocking10% Overall Wear/Tear of career (# of touches)10% Age Factor10% Injury Risk/History10% Odds/Opportunity of being a "Bell Cow" running backI am still working on an early spreadsheet for WR and TE, but what does everyone think of the QB and RB breakdown?

I would say a QB's receivers are more important than their injury risk. While guys like Vick and odgers are more likely to get hurt than Peyton and Brees, it is still fluky. I would rather my QB's have good WR's and TE's to throw to than a slightly less chance of getting hurt.
I agree. Injury risk is hard to quantify because in fact almost all QBs will be hurt at some point. I think there may have been only two QBs who started every game for their team--Brees and Bradford. Injuries are harder to predict than just --this guy runs or this guy doesn't slide. I think you have age wrong too--you have the same factor for QBs as for RBs. But QBs can play into their late 30s very effectively. WRs can play into mid 30s. And RBs rarely produce well beyond 30.
I do not use the same age scale for each position....QBS do not lose points for age until far after the other positions. RBs lose them the earliest.I have lowered the injury risk importance on all positions, especially QB because it is rather flukey.I youf are playing for the next 5 years I could see an argument for ADP at 5....course if it were a draft format I would probably pick him then trade him because most probably have him in the top 2 or 3 at this point.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Freeman love here is out of control. Talking about him in the top 5????

I can't see how anyone realistically has him higher than around #10.

He finished 7th at age 22. Do you see him regressing?

Not sure I'd put him top 5 myself, but it's not outlandish at all.

- 1st rounder

- prototypical size

- extremely impressive mobility and instincts

- excellent young talent around him

- only 22

- 60% completion, 7+ ypa

- running stats

What's not to like?

1. He didn't finish 7th.

2. Using PPG is much more accurate.

3. Matt Cassel scored more than him, with a slow start.

4. Matt Schaub scored more than him, playing injured, and throwing to an injured AJ, who also missed 2 games.

5. Eli Manning scored more than him.

Don't get me wrong, he was a solid suprise this year. But top should be reserved for the elite and Freeman has a ways to go to get there.

He did finish 7th in my standard scoring league but I guess depending on decimal use, Schaub and Eli might inch ahead of him.

Cassel, Schaub, and Eli all have much more experience. They'll continue to finish right there in the 7-12 range. Freeman will likely stay in that range too but he may vault higher. That makes him much more attractive to me, but to each his own.

Uh...what kind of scoring is that? Heck, in my league, he was only #14 in total points, and #22 in PPG at the QB spot. That is barely a QB2 in a 12-team league.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree. Injury risk is hard to quantify because in fact almost all QBs will be hurt at some point. I think there may have been only two QBs who started every game for their team--Brees and Bradford. Injuries are harder to predict than just --this guy runs or this guy doesn't slide.

I think you have age wrong too--you have the same factor for QBs as for RBs. But QBs can play into their late 30s very effectively. WRs can play into mid 30s. And RBs rarely produce well beyond 30.

QBs who started all 15 games so far this season:

Brady

Rivers

Brees

Peyton Manning

Eli Manning

Ryan

Bradford

Schaub

Freeman

Flacco

Palmer

Sanchez

There were others who didn't miss time due to injury but rather due to other reasons (e.g., Roethlisberger, Cassell).

And some of these guys (Rivers, Peyton, Eli, Ryan?, Bradford) have never missed a game due to injury. Some guys have a combination of durability and style (e.g., not big runners/scramblers) that keep them from getting hurt.

Edited by Just Win Baby
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished up the RB rankings (as of now, obviously off-season moves can shift things a little + rookies). They are ranked based on:Talent 40%O-line 5% (this can change as well depending on stability of the lineup from 2010, additions, departures, etc.)Rushing 9% (metrics to account for production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)Receiving 3% (metrics of production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)Wear/Tear 10% (overall load of their touches in NFL career)Age 10% (based on the shelf life of running backs)Injury Risk 3% (wanted it to be a factor, but not one to skew the rankings very much as injuries are definitely unpredictable)Bell Cow 20% (odds that they will be a full-time starter like ADP as an example has a score of 5.0, while R.Bush has a score of 1.0 as I never see him being a bell cow).All categories are 1-5 on a sliding scale within the category, so 5.0 would be a perfect score.Here is the top 5 based on that breakdown....Charles - 4.79Foster - 4.57McFadden-4.53Stewart - 4.40ADP - 4.38ADP is in the #5 spot because he has more wear and tear than the others, the top 3 have the edge in REC metrics and all have him in age. The top 2 have a better O-line as well. Thoughts?

Wow. Looking at that list I would say your system is flawed. I know he had a bad year compared to last year but I have a hrad time seeing Chris Johnson out of the top 5.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished up the RB rankings (as of now, obviously off-season moves can shift things a little + rookies). They are ranked based on:

Talent 40%

O-line 5% (this can change as well depending on stability of the lineup from 2010, additions, departures, etc.)

Rushing 9% (metrics to account for production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)

Receiving 3% (metrics of production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)

Wear/Tear 10% (overall load of their touches in NFL career)

Age 10% (based on the shelf life of running backs)

Injury Risk 3% (wanted it to be a factor, but not one to skew the rankings very much as injuries are definitely unpredictable)

Bell Cow 20% (odds that they will be a full-time starter like ADP as an example has a score of 5.0, while R.Bush has a score of 1.0 as I never see him being a bell cow).

All categories are 1-5 on a sliding scale within the category, so 5.0 would be a perfect score.

Here is the top 5 based on that breakdown....

Charles - 4.79

Foster - 4.57

McFadden-4.53

Stewart - 4.40

ADP - 4.38

ADP is in the #5 spot because he has more wear and tear than the others, the top 3 have the edge in REC metrics and all have him in age. The top 2 have a better O-line as well. Thoughts?

I realize this is a work-in-progress and you are still tweaking the numbers, but I think your top 5 shows the flaw in assigning arbitrary percentages to categories and doing a ranking from that.

I think that it is unlikely that any start-up draft next year will not have Chris Johnson somewhere in the top 5 - and probably we are talking ADP and Johnson being the consensus top 2 choices. Arguably MJD should be in the mix too, but his omission doesn't bother me.

Anyway, while I wouldn't have Charles as the #1, I can accept him being there. Same with Foster, he is probably the real deal, but I just have some slight skepticism. However, I do have a problem with the McFadden listing - and while I like him as much as anyone, he wouldn't be my third selection. And Stewart seems way out of whack, I think he will be a stud RB somewhere down the line - but honestly, I can't see him going that high in any draft, and to taking him at that level would a be a definite reach IMO.

By the way, I do commend you for undertaking this rather ambitious project, it is just that the current results don't sit that well with me.

Edited by squistion
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished up the RB rankings (as of now, obviously off-season moves can shift things a little + rookies). They are ranked based on:Talent 40%O-line 5% (this can change as well depending on stability of the lineup from 2010, additions, departures, etc.)Rushing 9% (metrics to account for production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)Receiving 3% (metrics of production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)Wear/Tear 10% (overall load of their touches in NFL career)Age 10% (based on the shelf life of running backs)Injury Risk 3% (wanted it to be a factor, but not one to skew the rankings very much as injuries are definitely unpredictable)Bell Cow 20% (odds that they will be a full-time starter like ADP as an example has a score of 5.0, while R.Bush has a score of 1.0 as I never see him being a bell cow).All categories are 1-5 on a sliding scale within the category, so 5.0 would be a perfect score.Here is the top 5 based on that breakdown....Charles - 4.79Foster - 4.57McFadden-4.53Stewart - 4.40ADP - 4.38ADP is in the #5 spot because he has more wear and tear than the others, the top 3 have the edge in REC metrics and all have him in age. The top 2 have a better O-line as well. Thoughts?

Wow. Looking at that list I would say your system is flawed. I know he had a bad year compared to last year but I have a hrad time seeing Chris Johnson out of the top 5.
This system might do better if he made the rushing and receiving metrics the average of the player's last three years. Or maybe better yet, the average per game for each from the total games played over the last three years. That would seem better than just going over the 2010 production.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finished up the RB rankings (as of now, obviously off-season moves can shift things a little + rookies). They are ranked based on:

Talent 40%

O-line 5% (this can change as well depending on stability of the lineup from 2010, additions, departures, etc.)

Rushing 9% (metrics to account for production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)

Receiving 3% (metrics of production, efficiency, etc. from 2010)

Wear/Tear 10% (overall load of their touches in NFL career)

Age 10% (based on the shelf life of running backs)

Injury Risk 3% (wanted it to be a factor, but not one to skew the rankings very much as injuries are definitely unpredictable)

Bell Cow 20% (odds that they will be a full-time starter like ADP as an example has a score of 5.0, while R.Bush has a score of 1.0 as I never see him being a bell cow).

All categories are 1-5 on a sliding scale within the category, so 5.0 would be a perfect score.

Here is the top 5 based on that breakdown....

Charles - 4.79

Foster - 4.57

McFadden-4.53

Stewart - 4.40

ADP - 4.38

ADP is in the #5 spot because he has more wear and tear than the others, the top 3 have the edge in REC metrics and all have him in age. The top 2 have a better O-line as well. Thoughts?

And Stewart seems way out of whack, I think he will be a stud RB somewhere down the line - but honestly, I can't see him going that high in any draft, and to taking him at that level would a be a definite reach IMO.
Assuming DeAngelo Williams moves on would it still seem like a reach? It was just last year that Stewart was tearing up the NFL, and he even started to get back into form towards the end of this year. He'll only be 24 next year, has proven his skill in the NFL, and has a high draft pedigree. All he's missing is a more ideal situation, and even that doesn't seem too unfixable to me. How often does one have a chance to draft a proven 24 year old stud?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Stewart has a high "bell cow" score for me because I am assuming D.Williams moves on in 2011. If he were to return and they split again, obviously Stewart's score would fall (as well as Williams' because I have him being the featured back where he lands in 2011).

The parts of the equation that caused ADP and C.Johnson to fall in the rankings (both are still inside the top 10) is that they have a good number of touches already in their career - and in terms of running backs, they are not spring chickens when you consider the life of an NFL RB. In those two categories they take a hit to the players above them.

I agree that McFadden is a huge wildcard in 2011 because of his checkered history, but his youth, lack of wear/tear, efficiency on a touch by touch basis, and #1 status on the team/not just a 1st and 2nd down player as well pushes his score up. Yes, personally I would not take him ahead of ADP, but not rankings are perfect so that you can follow them exactly when you draft.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did some work on WRs last night....

based on:

60% talent

12% age

10% Target stat's, offensive involvement

7% QB skill/production

5% Red zone production/involvement

4% Efficiency metrics with the touches they do receive

2% Injury flags/concerns

Top 3 turned out : Calvin, Fitz, AJ.

more of a drop off after those 3 to the #4 slot - Nicks....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

not sure if you are accounting for qb effect on wr properly. fitz that high seems off. esp at the dismissal of roddy white.

as for carolina situation, i think its almost a certaint that goodson gets the passing down and third down roll. stewart is not known for his hands nor does he have much experience in that roll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All categories are 1-5 on a sliding scale within the category, so 5.0 would be a perfect score.

Here is the top 5 based on that breakdown....

Charles - 4.79

Foster - 4.57

McFadden-4.53

Stewart - 4.40

ADP - 4.38

ADP is in the #5 spot because he has more wear and tear than the others, the top 3 have the edge in REC metrics and all have him in age. The top 2 have a better O-line as well. Thoughts?

And Stewart seems way out of whack, I think he will be a stud RB somewhere down the line - but honestly, I can't see him going that high in any draft, and to taking him at that level would a be a definite reach IMO.
Assuming DeAngelo Williams moves on would it still seem like a reach? It was just last year that Stewart was tearing up the NFL, and he even started to get back into form towards the end of this year. He'll only be 24 next year, has proven his skill in the NFL, and has a high draft pedigree. All he's missing is a more ideal situation, and even that doesn't seem too unfixable to me. How often does one have a chance to draft a proven 24 year old stud?
Yes, at the 4 spot it would and I was taking the probabilty of that into consideration. Look, you are preaching to the choir, I am a believer that Stewart has elite talent and will be a stud performer at some point in the future. I thought enough of him to draft him as my #1 RB in a start up draft this year. However, with the situation in Carolina in flux as to HC, QB, etc. I have no reason to believe at this time that any back will put up good numbers there next year. And since I use a shorter time frame than many here (3 years with the next year representing 50% of value) I would put Stewart behind, ADP, CJ, Charles, MJD, McFadden, Rice, Mendenhall, McCoy and maybe Foster.

I usually enter one new start up league a year and Stewart will be on my target list, but not at the beginning of the 1st round, more towards the end of it or the early 2nd. And depending on how thing shake out in Carolina, it would not surprise me to see him again slip into the 2nd round in most drafts. There is really not a lot of enthusiam I see for Stewart out there at the moment (I could be wrong) so while he is a player I would draft I think the 1.04 would be a reach, if you had that pick, I bet you could drop down to 1.08-1.10 and have no problem getting him.

Edited by squistion
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The parts of the equation that caused ADP and C.Johnson to fall in the rankings (both are still inside the top 10) is that they have a good number of touches already in their career - and in terms of running backs, they are not spring chickens when you consider the life of an NFL RB. In those two categories they take a hit to the players above them.

I think your calculation is penalizing touches too much if guys like ADP and Chris Johnson take a hit due to touches in their careers.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
  • Create New...