Disagreement on projections...

[cre8tiff]

I'm telling ya. When WW was doing the start/bench, you could count on consistency with DMD. Maybe they had dinner together, or some sort of mind-meld, I dunno. They may differ a little, but basically about the same level of confidence.

 

J2T takes up the start/bench and you can count on at least a half dozen major contradictions with DMD. DMD will predict a dude will go off, J2T will say bench him. And vice-versa.

 

Makes it tough to base picks on theHuddle recommendations. I know diversity of opinion is a good thing, but lately I have been resorting to other sites to pick players where these two so drastically differ.

[DMD]

for one, we both have Friday updates. But we both give our reasoning to some extent. Give me an example and I will further explain my view.

[Hugh 0ne]

WW and DMD are both from TEXAS, OUR TEXAS, OH HAIL THE MIGHTY STATE, TEXAS OUR TEXAS, SO WONDERFUL AND GREAT... and love Tom Landry, so their predictions fell in line.

 

[cre8tiff]

for one, we both have Friday updates. But we both give our reasoning to some extent. Give me an example and I will further explain my view.

 

Davone Bess. Number 7 WR in your hit parade. Stone Cold BENCH in J2T's.

 

Maurice Morris, Number 6 RB, another Bench.

 

Not meaning to pick on JT, cause it goes the other way too, but those are the ones jump out.

 

I've just been noticing that, and thought I would see if anyone else has the same problem...

Edited December 11, 2008 by cre8tiff

[rajncajn]

So what do you do if the other site's projection is way off from The Huddle?

 

BTW, that's a rhetorical question & I think it's John Tuvey, not John Tooty

[tazinib1]

So what do you do if the other site's projection is way off from The Huddle?

 

BTW, that's a rhetorical question & I think it's John Tuvey, not John Tooty

 

lol...I was wondering who J2T was. I'm very confident in 2v's projections as well as DMD. I take what both say and factor in my own opinions. I don't want the Huddle to do ALL the work!! Well ok maybe most of it.

[cre8tiff]

lol...I was wondering who J2T was. I'm very confident in 2v's projections as well as DMD. I take what both say and factor in my own opinions. I don't want the Huddle to do ALL the work!! Well ok maybe most of it.

 

I understand that, but when they disagree so often, how is that value added to the site? I mean they in essence cancel each other out and you are back to square one.

[cre8tiff]

So what do you do if the other site's projection is way off from The Huddle?

 

BTW, that's a rhetorical question & I think it's John Tuvey, not John Tooty

 

I always trust the huddle first. I use other sites when DMD and j2V (thanks) so completely disagree.

[Azazello1313]

just take it as two different opinions. I don't see the problem.

[MrTed46]

Orton or Thigpen?

 

Did I disguise it enough?

Edited December 11, 2008 by MrTed46

[skylive5]

Huh. And all this time I thought that WW was still doing to Start/Bench. How long has this been going on? Why didn't someone send me the memo?

[Big John]

Huh. And all this time I thought that WW was still doing to Start/Bench. How long has this been going on? Why didn't someone send me the memo?

Tuvey was doing this all this year.

[rajncajn]

I always trust the huddle first. I use other sites when DMD and j2V (thanks) so completely disagree.

I prefer to get many different opinions anyway. I actually want to see people come up with different scenarios for players so that I can have more info to formulate my own opinion. Not trying to knock on you, but this is the only way to feel more confident in who you are starting.

[skylive5]

Tuvey was doing this all this year.

 

Guess I should start reading the "who by" from now on.

 

Wonder if I can get WW to send me a personal start/bench via email? LOL

[DMD]

Davone Bess. Number 7 WR in your hit parade. Stone Cold BENCH in J2T's.

 

Maurice Morris, Number 6 RB, another Bench.

 

Not meaning to pick on JT, cause it goes the other way too, but those are the ones jump out.

 

I've just been noticing that, and thought I would see if anyone else has the same problem...

 

It is a function largely of the way both are approached and what both are saying.

 

Tuvey is saying that he doesn't like the Fins offense this week other than marginally the rushing game. Compared to all other players in those positions, he says that you should probably bench then.

 

I look at the game and determine what projections will come out of it. I like Pennington to have a sub-par game with only 190 passing yards and one score. Not much disagreement with 2V. In the distribution of stats, I have to award them based on what I feel are most likely to occur. The numbers have to go somewhere. I had one passing score to award that could obviously go anywhere but based on recent history of both teams, I see that Bess is slightly more likely to catch it than any other player but how much more can very greatly and I have to award a TD. Plus I do not project the 8 to ten players that often catch a pass and all are available to score. So TDs as a single play event are always of less confidence. By that token, then I am really saying I like him to catch 80 yards and he might have a TD more than the others on his team. Then there is the risk factor on relying on a player that has a short track record like Bess that is easy to throw a "B" on but I have stats to distribute and they need to go somewhere that is more likely to happen than other scenarios. I liked how Pennington used Bess last week in BUF (9-74). But should you start Bess over some other player on your roster? Hard projections - particularly adding in touchdowns - are created as the most likely to happen but there is risk,. confidence level, etc. that are all behind those hard numbers. The SBL is just considering all those factors and saying if he thinks the player is worth playing or not. I honestly do not see the difference I guess others do because the two measures are entirely two different measurements that say two very different things.

 

I could write reams on what I am doing and saying versus what the other report is doing plus there will always be spots where we just do not always agree. The only way that will ever be resolve is if we just merge everything into a single report and I don't think that is what most would want. It takes a huge effort to do those two reports and I absolutely admit we never look at each others stuff.

[tonorator]

just take it as two different opinions. I don't see the problem.

 

it's a problem for someone who wants to just go with who the huddle recommends if the huddle is contradicting itself.

 

that said, if the huddle contradicts itself via opposing views, that is good info for me as an owner. it tells me that the risk associated with that player is higher and i better be darn sure of my reasons for going with him. it's these players that i spend the most time debating and then may also go looking on other sites for any other bit of info that can help.

 

so no biggie for me when dmd and tuvey disagree. i actually find it helpful to know where to focus.

 

in fact, i think it woud be a great feature to highlight these players each week and then give more data on upside/downside. call it "players in the spotlight" or whatever and list more info on the choice we have in front of us. we do this already in the boards, but it woud be cool to see maybe a friday feature that highlighted the different opinions and offered up some additonal insight.

[Hat Trick]

in fact, i think it woud be a great feature to highlight these players each week and then give more data on upside/downside. call it "players in the spotlight" or whatever and list more info on the choice we have in front of us. we do this already in the boards, but it woud be cool to see maybe a friday feature that highlighted the different opinions and offered up some additonal insight.

 

That's a great idea actually. Who is up for this task?

[cre8tiff]

it's a problem for someone who wants to just go with who the huddle recommends if the huddle is contradicting itself.

 

that said, if the huddle contradicts itself via opposing views, that is good info for me as an owner. it tells me that the risk associated with that player is higher and i better be darn sure of my reasons for going with him. it's these players that i spend the most time debating and then may also go looking on other sites for any other bit of info that can help.

 

so no biggie for me when dmd and tuvey disagree. i actually find it helpful to know where to focus.

 

in fact, i think it woud be a great feature to highlight these players each week and then give more data on upside/downside. call it "players in the spotlight" or whatever and list more info on the choice we have in front of us. we do this already in the boards, but it woud be cool to see maybe a friday feature that highlighted the different opinions and offered up some additonal insight.

 

Like they need more work! But perhaps a "Thumbs up versus Thumbs down" spotlight would be fun.

 

I suppose what Az says makes sense, if you are hard-core into it and WANT to consult tons of sources. I don't want to (nor have time to), and so I would like to pay the experts to do that for me. Call it spoon feeding if you want. I'm not saying they need to change anything. I'm just saying it has been harder for me this year with two widely diverging opinions on key players, and I have had to look for a tiebreaking opinion via compeditors, something I have never had to do before.

[tazinib1]

it's a problem for someone who wants to just go with who the huddle recommends if the huddle is contradicting itself.

 

that said, if the huddle contradicts itself via opposing views, that is good info for me as an owner. it tells me that the risk associated with that player is higher and i better be darn sure of my reasons for going with him. it's these players that i spend the most time debating and then may also go looking on other sites for any other bit of info that can help.

 

so no biggie for me when dmd and tuvey disagree. i actually find it helpful to know where to focus.

 

in fact, i think it woud be a great feature to highlight these players each week and then give more data on upside/downside. call it "players in the spotlight" or whatever and list more info on the choice we have in front of us. we do this already in the boards, but it woud be cool to see maybe a friday feature that highlighted the different opinions and offered up some additonal insight.

 

Thats a great idea. I can see an "On the Fence" article in the future.

[rajncajn]

it's a problem for someone who wants to just go with who the huddle recommends if the huddle is contradicting itself.

 

that said, if the huddle contradicts itself via opposing views, that is good info for me as an owner. it tells me that the risk associated with that player is higher and i better be darn sure of my reasons for going with him. it's these players that i spend the most time debating and then may also go looking on other sites for any other bit of info that can help.

 

so no biggie for me when dmd and tuvey disagree. i actually find it helpful to know where to focus.

 

in fact, i think it woud be a great feature to highlight these players each week and then give more data on upside/downside. call it "players in the spotlight" or whatever and list more info on the choice we have in front of us. we do this already in the boards, but it woud be cool to see maybe a friday feature that highlighted the different opinions and offered up some additonal insight.

Agree 100%, that would be an excellent feature since the studs & duds are typically the most obvious. It's the middle-of-the-road players that end up your 4th & 5th starters that can make or break a game & where most fantasy owners would be looking for help.

[MrTed46]

To be honest, I never understood the start/bench list. I personally would rather see another set of projections just like DMD does but from someone else. Start/Bench only works if they know who u have on your roster. JMHO

 

I of course, read the start bench for comments on why he gives him the rating he does.

[keggerz]

Darin and I have frequent differences of opinions with regards to IDP players but that is to be expected...the fail/success rate that is associated with this hobby is nuts so getting as many opinions as I can seems to be a benefit to me...and as someone said if there are two opinions that vary greatly then there is probably a fair amount of risk associated with that player.

Edited December 11, 2008 by keggerz

[Azazello1313]

I suppose what Az says makes sense, if you are hard-core into it and WANT to consult tons of sources. I don't want to (nor have time to), and so I would like to pay the experts to do that for me. Call it spoon feeding if you want.

 

you want someone else to do the thinking for you, fine, pick one and go with it as the gospel. forcing them into a more perfect harmony doesn't accomplish much. the spoon feeder is still just going to get spoon-fed someone else's opinion, and the person who wants to genuinely consider different opinions is robbed of at least one unique input.

[cre8tiff]

you want someone else to do the thinking for you, fine, pick one and go with it as the gospel. forcing them into a more perfect harmony doesn't accomplish much. the spoon feeder is still just going to get spoon-fed someone else's opinion, and the person who wants to genuinely consider different opinions is robbed of at least one unique input.

 

Very well said. Again, I'm not advocating a change. It would be silly for then to change thier business model based on one person's opinion. Clearly the users here aren't looking for the type of advice I am, so I'll defer.

Edited December 11, 2008 by cre8tiff

[peso24]

IMO, I take it as 2 different opinions. Both have their reasons so instead of relying solely on the info provided, do some research of your own and make your decisions instead of biting off another site.

 

BTW, which DST this week?:

 

Dallas or Minny?