Do you value ANY national FF writer?

[WaterMan]

how does that make any sense? If you are to lazy there is no way you are going to bother looking for trends or at past performances...fwiw, the early part of seasons are the hardest to predict because you only have historical trends and performances to look at versus using those plus the current seasons trends, performances and additonal info....I ranked over 330 IDP players this week and I surely knew I was going to make some mistakes but I can guarantee you that there was thought and reasoning that went into each and every ranking...I can't speak for everyone but I feel pretty safe in saying that if someone is putting out rankings they are spending a hel1 of a ton more time than you realize to come up with them.

 

I don't know about the Huddle's writers because I don't read them, but other sites like Yahoo seem to take the easy way out. What I mean is their write up will say something to the lines of, "He ran up so many yards last year, this year will be a repeat." But then they fail to mention that the player lost a key addition to the team that helped his success. I remember Larry Johnson when he was starting RB for the Chiefs. Alot of writers thought he was going to put up the same numbers without those great linemen Priest Holmes had. Didn't happen. It just seems like once someone has a good season or three that some writers get lazy and think the player's numbers are all because of him and no other factors around him.

[raoul duke]

Most of the usual suspects all say the same things these days, so the rankings are the only way to differentiate between them. But the main problem with rankings is that they are based on their particular employers' default rules. My league includes return yards and long yardage bonuses. None of these guys are ranking players with my league in mind.

 

I listen to Berry and Ravitz for amusement, but I read The Huddle for the superior statistical analysis and reasonable opinions. And it's great to have the homer reports in the forums here, too.

 

You can check out the scorecard of all the national sites at www.ffadvisor.com

 

WD

 

Thanks for the link. I'll be checking this out. I don't see their methodology anywhere, but, it seems like they should remove injuries from the equation, since a low Ryan Grant ranking last week would be rewarded, while his numbers weren't necessarily a result of poor performance. In fact, his per-carry average was excellent.