irish Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 If you're playing dynasty and need external rankings then you are what's called in the poker world, a donor. We're all donors at one point or another. The difference is the really good players donate less of the time, while the lesser talented owners, donate a really good amount of time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QFFL Posted April 20, 2014 Share Posted April 20, 2014 If you're playing dynasty and need external rankings then you are what's called in the poker world, a donor. It never hurts to check what other thoughts and form your own opinion. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NAUgrad Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 It never hurts to check what other thoughts and form your own opinion. Exactly. I sometimes learn a lot from others thoughts and opinions on rankings and various players. In the end, sometimes I'm convinced I was wrong, sometimes I stick to my guns and make changes. Either way it is incredibly valuable for people to post why they do or don't agree with rankings. Would it be that bad of an idea to put a few players in crazy spots in hopes of starting up some discussion here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 We're all donors at one point or another. The difference is the really good players donate less of the time, while the lesser talented owners, donate a really good amount of time. That's cause the lesser talented owners are using crappy rankings..... 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 That's cause the lesser talented owners are using crappy rankings..... So you're saying the more talented owners are using good rankings? Or are you saying that more talented owners don't even need rankings? Just curious and playing Devil's Advocate here. I mean, if you're evaluating rookies, do you do all the film work yourself or do you rely on scouts' and other "expert" opinions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 So you're saying the more talented owners are using good rankings? Or are you saying that more talented owners don't even need rankings? Just curious and playing Devil's Advocate here. I mean, if you're evaluating rookies, do you do all the film work yourself or do you rely on scouts' and other "expert" opinions? No, I'm saying most good owners make their own rankings. A guy like Muto I assume does his own rankings so I don't understand why he's so upset that the dyno rankings here don't match his. I see lots of rankings that don't match mine. When it happens I question mine, possibly adjust and move on. I'm sure people would look at some of mine and think its crazy. And if an owner is good and makes his own ranking than his ranking will be good. Can't speak to the rookie aspect since we were talking dyno but I generally get mine from a combination of writes who focus on rookies. I don't have time to watch CFB let own "do film study" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 No, I'm saying most good owners make their own rankings. A guy like Muto I assume does his own rankings so I don't understand why he's so upset that the dyno rankings here don't match his. I see lots of rankings that don't match mine. When it happens I question mine, possibly adjust and move on. I'm sure people would look at some of mine and think its crazy. And if an owner is good and makes his own ranking than his ranking will be good. Can't speak to the rookie aspect since we were talking dyno but I generally get mine from a combination of writes who focus on rookies. I don't have time to watch CFB let own "do film study" I'm confused. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I think Zooty was just trying to rip on Muto and it backfired. Nothing to see here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 (edited) No, I'm saying most good owners make their own rankings. A guy like Muto I assume does his own rankings so I don't understand why he's so upset that the dyno rankings here don't match his. I see lots of rankings that don't match mine. When it happens I question mine, possibly adjust and move on. I'm sure people would look at some of mine and think its crazy. And if an owner is good and makes his own ranking than his ranking will be good. Can't speak to the rookie aspect since we were talking dyno but I generally get mine from a combination of writes who focus on rookies. I don't have time to watch CFB let own "do film study" I think Muto is bothered by the rankings here because it is a pay site and they are, in some obvious cases so very off and I would agree. Some of the examples listed here are just without rational explanation and to say they will be adjusted once the draft is complete is just not a good excuse because some people have drafts now and need updated info all year round to use for drafts, trades, etc. Sure, good owners do their own rankings and have their own draft sheets but that doesn't remove the responsibility of the huddle or any pay site from producing their best material, for all purposes, at all times. Edited April 21, 2014 by irish 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I think what Zooty is trying to say is that he gathers information (not rankings, but other info) from a bunch of different sources, then establishes his own set of rankings (based on that info), rather than just looking at someone else's rankings. I think that's pretty much what a lot of us do, to some degree or another. I look at rankings (the Huddle's and others), not so much to use them to establish my own rankings, but to look for major discrepancies. If I have a player ranked way differently than the Huddle does, it might cause me to either look at that player more closely, or question (publicly or otherwise) why the player is ranked so high/low here. So, maybe that is all that Muto was doing (questioning). I agree that it's kind of silly to (seemingly) get so upset about it, though. I mean, after all, the rankings are just a very small part of the paid content (on any FF site), and if they're wrong, it's not really going to change my opinion of a particular player. It might cause me to look deeper (to make sure I didn't miss something), but that's not a bad thing. Plus, at the end of the day, bad rankings simply Josh Gordon out the scrubs (those who rely way too much on a site's rankings alone) from those of us who might actually "do their homework" on the player in question. Questioning rankings that we disagree with kind of reminds me of how I feel about bringing up my list of sleepers every year. If they're guys that I really consider to be sleepers, the last thing I want to do is bring up their names on a public forum. Likewise, if I truly feel the rankings are way off, I'm probably just going to leave it be, especially if I'm on a board/forum with a bunch of guys who I'm competing with in multiple leagues. That said, if somebody is on your list of sleepers, there's a pretty good chance he's on the list of several others, as well. So, sometimes it makes sense to partake in conversation, if for no other reason than it's interesting to hear others' opinions (and maybe help confirm your thoughts about the player). 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 And, to be honest, I get the impression that some of the writers here (Keg excluded) don't dabble all that much in dynasty leagues, compared to the time they spend on redrafts (or even "keeper" leagues). No offense to anybody here, but that's just the impression I get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I think what Zooty is trying to say is that he gathers information (not rankings, but other info) from a bunch of different sources, then establishes his own set of rankings (based on that info), rather than just looking at someone else's rankings. I think that's pretty much what a lot of us do, to some degree or another. I look at rankings (the Huddle's and others), not so much to use them to establish my own rankings, but to look for major discrepancies. If I have a player ranked way differently than the Huddle does, it might cause me to either look at that player more closely, or question (publicly or otherwise) why the player is ranked so high/low here. So, maybe that is all that Muto was doing (questioning). I agree that it's kind of silly to (seemingly) get so upset about it, though. I mean, after all, the rankings are just a very small part of the paid content (on any FF site), and if they're wrong, it's not really going to change my opinion of a particular player. It might cause me to look deeper (to make sure I didn't miss something), but that's not a bad thing. Plus, at the end of the day, bad rankings simply Josh Gordon out the scrubs (those who rely way too much on a site's rankings alone) from those of us who might actually "do their homework" on the player in question. Questioning rankings that we disagree with kind of reminds me of how I feel about bringing up my list of sleepers every year. If they're guys that I really consider to be sleepers, the last thing I want to do is bring up their names on a public forum. Likewise, if I truly feel the rankings are way off, I'm probably just going to leave it be, especially if I'm on a board/forum with a bunch of guys who I'm competing with in multiple leagues. That said, if somebody is on your list of sleepers, there's a pretty good chance he's on the list of several others, as well. So, sometimes it makes sense to partake in conversation, if for no other reason than it's interesting to hear others' opinions (and maybe help confirm your thoughts about the player). agree w/ all Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 That's cause the lesser knowledgeable owners are using crappy rankings..... Fixed. I'm a firm believer that fantasy football success is 50% luck, and the other 50% driven by how much knowledge you have (which, in large part, can be attributed to how much time you have on your hands). Not in all cases (there are some guys that simply "get it" more than others), but a lot of it. I just don't think that "talent" has much to do with any of it, frankly. Then again, we may just be mincing words. Your idea of "talent" might be no different than my idea of "knowledge", if that makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I don't have time to watch CFB let own "do film study" I think this part of your statement says it all for me, because I'm pretty much 100% in the same boat. If I had to rely on watching college football to be successful in dynasty leagues, I would probably be the worst dynasty owner in the history of dynasty leagues. The older I get (and the older my kids get), the less time I have to actually watch sports... and my kids are 3.5 and 2, LOL. I used to watch games (of some kind or another) every day, and several sporting events on the weekends. Football, hoops, baseball, golf, tennis, etc. You name it. If it was on, and it wasn't Nascar or bowling, I was probably watching. Now, I watch as much NFL as my wife lets me get away with, some golf on Sundays (at least the majors), the NCAA tourney, and the NBA playoffs (not even the entire playoffs... usually start watching a series when it gets to an elimination game). Outside of Minnesota, I can count the number of college football games I watched this year on one hand. Sure, I watched bits and pieces, here and there. But, in terms of watching most/all of a game, I can't think of any/many. So, fantasy football has become a game of figuring out how to find information, and knowing what to do with that information. And, I'm fine with that. Don't have the time to watch all of the sports I used to, but I'd rather continue with this hobby/game, than to quit, and continue to watch 40 hours of sports every week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I think this part of your statement says it all for me, because I'm pretty much 100% in the same boat. If I had to rely on watching college football to be successful in dynasty leagues, I would probably be the worst dynasty owner in the history of dynasty leagues. The older I get (and the older my kids get), the less time I have to actually watch sports... and my kids are 3.5 and 2, LOL. I used to watch games (of some kind or another) every day, and several sporting events on the weekends. Football, hoops, baseball, golf, tennis, etc. You name it. If it was on, and it wasn't Nascar or bowling, I was probably watching. Now, I watch as much NFL as my wife lets me get away with, some golf on Sundays (at least the majors), the NCAA tourney, and the NBA playoffs (not even the entire playoffs... usually start watching a series when it gets to an elimination game). Outside of Minnesota, I can count the number of college football games I watched this year on one hand. Sure, I watched bits and pieces, here and there. But, in terms of watching most/all of a game, I can't think of any/many. So, fantasy football has become a game of figuring out how to find information, and knowing what to do with that information. And, I'm fine with that. Don't have the time to watch all of the sports I used to, but I'd rather continue with this hobby/game, than to quit, and continue to watch 40 hours of sports every week. ... agree with this too, and it's why I was confused with what Zooty was saying. He first says that "good dynasty owners don't look at rankings", but then says he doesn't have time to watch college football so relies on experts (assuming this means "rankings") for rookies. So I was just confused, thinking the statement was a little hypocritical... like, it's OK to go to experts for rookie rankings but not for dynasty? Or redraft? We have to do our own rankings there... to be considered a "good" dynasty owner? ... Mainly I'm just busting balls and/or playing with semantics.... I enjoy looking at rankings, be it redraft, dynasty, rookie, whatever. Like you I enjoy seeing where other folks rank guys... especially guys they deem "sleepers". Heck I could be missing someone good. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Just to reiterate on this thread that never dies, to have any draft before you know the schedule and before the NFL draft is making decisions based on very incomplete information at best. To draft a rookie before he is on an NFL team is so speculative that you introduce so many unknown variables that it ends up to be far more luck than skill to be sure. That you would draft an entire dynasty team prior to the draft boggles my mind and if it is just adding rookies and free agents, why would you want to do that prior to knowing where they are going? How can you really say anyone is right or wrong until you know what players the team is going to use for the year? Those generic preliminary rankings were to help someone who had to make a keeper decision more than anything. Let me get the schedule, see the NFL draft and work 24x7 for several weeks and I more than welcome discussing any player's position in any of the sort of rankings and scoring and projections. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I think Zooty was just trying to rip on Muto and it backfired. Nothing to see here. Not at all. I jyst don't get all the pissing and moaning that goes on with rankings Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Just to reiterate on this thread that never dies, to have any draft before you know the schedule and before the NFL draft is making decisions based on very incomplete information at best. To draft a rookie before he is on an NFL team is so speculative that you introduce so many unknown variables that it ends up to be far more luck than skill to be sure. That you would draft an entire dynasty team prior to the draft boggles my mind and if it is just adding rookies and free agents, why would you want to do that prior to knowing where they are going? How can you really say anyone is right or wrong until you know what players the team is going to use for the year? Those generic preliminary rankings were to help someone who had to make a keeper decision more than anything. Let me get the schedule, see the NFL draft and work 24x7 for several weeks and I more than welcome discussing any player's position in any of the sort of rankings and scoring and projections. Most dynasty rookie drafts take place after the NFL draft, at least based on my limited experience. I'm sure there are some that take place before the NFL draft, but I don't know of (or participate in) any, and I'm guessing it's pretty safe to say that it's far from the norm. As far as knowing the schedule before you draft, that's kind of the point that some people are trying to make... that dynasty and redraft leagues are totally different, in terms of what factors matter most. A player's schedule plays a far bigger role in where they get drafted in a redraft league, than it does in a dynasty league. It's still a factor in a dynasty league, but a much smaller factor than in a league where all that matters is this year. Conversely, age plays a much bigger factor in dynasties than it does in redrafts. Of course, there are also all kinds of different dynasty leagues... Some with rules that make it more difficult to retain a player than others. If I'm drafting in a league where I can potentially keep the player for the extent of their NFL career, I'm far more likely to pick Luck over Manning than I am in a league where my hands are tied, in terms of how long I can keep a player (limited contract years, salaries, etc.). I realize that I'm probably not telling you anything you don't already know. Just trying to explain why some here don't value Manning anywhere close to the same as they would Rodgers, for example. In a lot of dynasty leagues, it's about how long you can keep guys, particularly at premium positions. Having the best player is great, but if you can't keep that player next year, it might be in your best interest to let them go, trade them (or not draft them at all). It's a completely different mindset. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gopher Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Not at all. I jyst don't get all the pissing and moaning that goes on with rankings +1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
irish Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 Not at all. I jyst don't get all the pissing and moaning that goes on with rankings Ah, sure ya do. That's what this place is always about. Bitching about anything for the fun of it. Rate my team threads, rate my trade threads, who's gonna win this week threads, etc. They all get ripped up. So why not a "rate the huddle rankings thread" and have people debate it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zooty Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 ... agree with this too, and it's why I was confused with what Zooty was saying. He first says that "good dynasty owners don't look at rankings", but then says he doesn't have time to watch college football so relies on experts (assuming this means "rankings") for rookies. So I was just confused, thinking the statement was a little hypocritical... like, it's OK to go to experts for rookie rankings but not for dynasty? Or redraft? We have to do our own rankings there... to be considered a "good" dynasty owner? ... Mainly I'm just busting balls and/or playing with semantics.... I enjoy looking at rankings, be it redraft, dynasty, rookie, whatever. Like you I enjoy seeing where other folks rank guys... especially guys they deem "sleepers". Heck I could be missing someone good. I'm not really sure which part confused you but half of it was fishing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darin3 Posted April 21, 2014 Share Posted April 21, 2014 I'm not really sure which part confused you but half of it was fishing. I figured... Another thing to mention is that many dynasty leagues are in RFA periods right now. I know folks love to go look at a current snapshot of player value. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Footballjoe Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Where do you guys have Sonny J ranked? I can't decide whether to rank him the 2 or 3 QB. Please advise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted April 22, 2014 Share Posted April 22, 2014 Just to reiterate on this thread that never dies, to have any draft before you know the schedule and before the NFL draft is making decisions based on very incomplete information at best. To draft a rookie before he is on an NFL team is so speculative that you introduce so many unknown variables that it ends up to be far more luck than skill to be sure. That you would draft an entire dynasty team prior to the draft boggles my mind and if it is just adding rookies and free agents, why would you want to do that prior to knowing where they are going? How can you really say anyone is right or wrong until you know what players the team is going to use for the year? Those generic preliminary rankings were to help someone who had to make a keeper decision more than anything. Let me get the schedule, see the NFL draft and work 24x7 for several weeks and I more than welcome discussing any player's position in any of the sort of rankings and scoring and projections. For a keeper decision, Manning is clearly superior to Luck. That definitely makes the rankings make more sense than if they were for an infinite dynasty type format. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Muto Posted April 22, 2014 Author Share Posted April 22, 2014 My bad I will refrain from referencing the rankings in the future as apparently no good fantasy owner would ever bother to use them. Lock this thread up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.