Rest of Season Cheat Sheet

[sonnyrandle]

My apologies in advance for the criticism, but The Huddle seriously needs to consider appointing someone else to write the RSCS.

 

Without delving into all the positions and rankings, consider these two examples. In his week four analysis, Mr. Bonini has Jeremy Langford as the #14 rated running back and Thomas Rawls listed as #23.

 

Their obvious replacements based on performance, Christine Michael is listed as #29, and Jordan Howard doesn't manage to break the top the top 72.

 

Unfortunately, this column has gotten to be a joke. A very sad joke.

[Junkyard]

Criticism would be asking for the rationale of why one player is listed at a ranking you might not agree with. You might gain insight you did not previously have, or perhaps the author might acknowledge your point and make a revision. Who knows? To jump in with your first post as calling a column a joke brings your own credibility into question.

[marcheese]

I enjoy the column for the most part; the only thing I wish is that it came out on Tuesday after the Monday Night Game.

[DMD]

It will be updated using MNF considerations from now on. And the rankings reflect the author's long-term view on the players and is not going to be overly reactive to single week events. In the cases you mention, there has been nothing official about either backs losing their jobs and the ROSCS is an ever changing thing. The transition from preseason expectations to the evolving realities is a constant effort over the initial month of the season and so far we only have three weeks at best about the 250-ish players that are on it. It may not change as quickly as you want regarding some individuals but it will constantly review and consider all players.

[squirrelmastr21]

In previous years I've taken the column into account when deciding who to add/drop. But it is of no help this year. Kenneth Dixon dropped this week? Why? He is supposedly coming back soon and could take the #1 spot in Baltimore. Only that has changed is that we are closer to his return date not farther away. So he should go up the rankings not down.

[squirrelmastr21]

Some other rankings I don't understand. Why is Theo Riddick so high and Dwayne Washington so low. They both got 10 carries but Theo got negative yardage. It's fine if Theo is higher because he is a great pass catcher. But Dwayne looks to be the main back and the goal line back.

Meanwhile Kenyan Drake was named the starter last week and had the most carries on the Dolphins but isnt even on the list.

Edited September 26, 2016 by squirrelmastr21

[Cory J. Bonini]

Some other rankings I don't understand. Why is Theo Riddick so high and Dwayne Washington so low. They both got 10 carries but Theo got negative yardage. It's fine if Theo is higher because he is a great pass catcher. But Dwayne looks to be the main back and the goal line back.

Meanwhile Kenyan Drake was named the starter last week and had the most carries on the Dolphins but isnt even on the list.

 

Riddick is a terrible running back at running the ball, but he's a weekly PPR play. These rankings are based on PPR. Washington wasn't exactly dynamic, and Detroit doesn't run the ball enough to give a non-PPR back like him much upside. I'll review it closer for the Tuesday update.

 

Drake was in the rankings ... I suspect he was accidentally overwritten. I'll add him for Tuesday. Thanks for the heads up.

[Cory J. Bonini]

My apologies in advance for the criticism, but The Huddle seriously needs to consider appointing someone else to write the RSCS.

 

Without delving into all the positions and rankings, consider these two examples. In his week four analysis, Mr. Bonini has Jeremy Langford as the #14 rated running back and Thomas Rawls listed as #23.

 

Their obvious replacements based on performance, Christine Michael is listed as #29, and Jordan Howard doesn't manage to break the top the top 72.

 

Unfortunately, this column has gotten to be a joke. A very sad joke.

I am sorry you don't enjoy the rankings so far. I'll strive for better, but the process and intention are probably much different than what you see.

 

The Bears RBs will be addressed in the Tuesday update. As a rule of thumb, most Sunday night game situations will not be heavily included in the Monday morning release. The weekly Tuesday update will help address these situations once we have a little better feel for what is happening.

 

Rawls is a better player than Michael, and as of submission time Sunday night, I had not seen anything to suggest Michael will outright steal the show. In fact, he was set to lose touches before Rawls was injured. Michael actually came up in the rankings, and I chose to take a "wait and see" approach with Rawls for now. That is the unfortunate balancing act in curating rankings like this -- how much weight should be put into one performance. In this case, it was a big game vs. a terrible defense while a better player was nursing an injury ... I have seen so much of Michael that there's little reason to give him the benefit of the doubt. If it looks like Rawls will miss several games or lose touches, Michael will be rewarded with a better ranking. I think 29th is more than fair right now.

 

I think it is important that you understand these rankings are a part of the puzzle and not meant to represent a "be all, end all" outlook on long-term player valuation. Far too many variables come into play to use the rankings otherwise.

 

Hopefully this helps. I am happy to answer any specific questions or offer feedback for long-term situations that may concern you.

[Cory J. Bonini]

In previous years I've taken the column into account when deciding who to add/drop. But it is of no help this year. Kenneth Dixon dropped this week? Why? He is supposedly coming back soon and could take the #1 spot in Baltimore. Only that has changed is that we are closer to his return date not farther away. So he should go up the rankings not down.

These rankings are fluid, so I'll revisit in Tuesday's update, but Dixon hasn't practiced in weeks and is coming back from a sprained knee ligament as a rookie. I think you're underestimating the sheer learning curve, even for a running back. More importantly, Marc Trestman and John Harbaugh are exceptionally loyal to veterans, so I wouldn't be too quick to jump on Dixon as the top dog in this backfield.

[rellen13]

Not to pile on, but do you have insider info on Jack Doyle that will cause him to miss the rest of the season? And is that why Allen is still ranked so high?

 

- A very nervous Allen owner....

[Cory J. Bonini]

Not to pile on, but do you have insider info on Jack Doyle that will cause him to miss the rest of the season? And is that why Allen is still ranked so high?

 

- A very nervous Allen owner....

Doyle will be included in the next update. Allen was left ranked highly because of the Moncrief injury, but that ranking probably is too optimistic. Doyle is seeing enough targets to cause concern, and Allen is a streaky player with a high boom-or-bust index.

[squirrelmastr21]

Appreciate the feed back. Knowing these PPR rankings helps.

[sonnyrandle]

"The Bears RBs will be addressed in the Tuesday update. As a rule of thumb, most Sunday night game situations will not be heavily included in the Monday morning release. The weekly Tuesday update will help address these situations once we have a little better feel for what is happening."

 

Excuse me for asking but why aren't Sunday night game situations included?

 

Wouldn't it be better to time stamp updates and mention that the ratings do not reflect Sunday night games?

 

This was a situation where a largely ineffective back was carted off the field and replaced by a back that was relatively effective. To suggest Langford is the #14 best running back and Howard isn't amongst the top 72 is beyond belief.

 

I can't speak for all others but I'd much prefer quality information as opposed to information that is posted late on Sunday afternoons so as to meet a deadline.

[Cory J. Bonini]

"The Bears RBs will be addressed in the Tuesday update. As a rule of thumb, most Sunday night game situations will not be heavily included in the Monday morning release. The weekly Tuesday update will help address these situations once we have a little better feel for what is happening."

 

Excuse me for asking but why aren't Sunday night game situations included?

 

Wouldn't it be better to time stamp updates and mention that the ratings do not reflect Sunday night games?

 

This was a situation where a largely ineffective back was carted off the field and replaced by a back that was relatively effective. To suggest Langford is the #14 best running back and Howard isn't amongst the top 72 is beyond belief.

 

I can't speak for all others but I'd much prefer quality information as opposed to information that is posted late on Sunday afternoons so as to meet a deadline.

No, I was working on the article until nearly midnight ET. Langford left with an injury, and I made a judgment call to wait before addressing the backfield until Tuesday, because I expected to know more to make the right decision, rather than a knee-jerk decision.

 

I'll look to be more judicious when making such calls in the future.

[stevegrab]

Can I suggest a small primer at the top that gives some info on the authors take. For example he mentions it being for PPR, and while I might suspect that (because they are the norm) it doesn't say that and should. Same goes for the "players from Sunday night not included, Tuesday updates will take SNF/MNF into account" Not every user of the Huddle reads the forums, but they should all know some of this info.

 

I've already adjusted the amount of weight I give these, and appreciate the efforts to make them better.

[Cory J. Bonini]

Can I suggest a small primer at the top that gives some info on the authors take. For example he mentions it being for PPR, and while I might suspect that (because they are the norm) it doesn't say that and should. Same goes for the "players from Sunday night not included, Tuesday updates will take SNF/MNF into account" Not every user of the Huddle reads the forums, but they should all know some of this info.

 

I've already adjusted the amount of weight I give these, and appreciate the efforts to make them better.

Absolutely ... I already whipped up something for the update that addresses much of this.

 

I want to be clear, because it seems like I wasn't ... SNF situations are included to a degree, but the weight is lower. Just like the weight of what happens in the 4 p.m. ET games is less than the 1 p.m. ... the reason being, proximity matters so much with injury evaluations, and also with playing time data that often isn't available so close to the conclusion of a contest.

[stevegrab]

Absolutely ... I already whipped up something for the update that addresses much of this.

 

I want to be clear, because it seems like I wasn't ... SNF situations are included to a degree, but the weight is lower. Just like the weight of what happens in the 4 p.m. ET games is less than the 1 p.m. ... the reason being, proximity matters so much with injury evaluations, and also with playing time data that often isn't available so close to the conclusion of a contest.

 

Ok, so do these players games/situations all get equal weight when you do the Tuesday update? Or are we just getting the MNF players included and all with an lesser weight than guys who played on Sunday early. I get that injuries take time to know the situation, but game play does not. 3 RB start splitting the load instead of a clear cut workhose, I'd think that's impacting their ROS.

 

Latavius Murray continues to get a smaller part of the OAK RB worlload, or do less with his share but his only movement was up (week 2-17, 3-16, 4-16). Is he really still just as valuable as at the beginning of the season (was 17 on standard scoring cheat sheet).

 

I think this is the issue some of us see, players we think should be upgrade/downgrade don't move much or at all.

 

I know it is mostly guesswork and not an exact science, so I don't expect a high order of accuracy. Maybe it takes a lot of change to move some players based on their original ranking.

[Cory J. Bonini]

 

Ok, so do these players games/situations all get equal weight when you do the Tuesday update? Or are we just getting the MNF players included and all with an lesser weight than guys who played on Sunday early. I get that injuries take time to know the situation, but game play does not. 3 RB start splitting the load instead of a clear cut workhose, I'd think that's impacting their ROS.

 

Latavius Murray continues to get a smaller part of the OAK RB worlload, or do less with his share but his only movement was up (week 2-17, 3-16, 4-16). Is he really still just as valuable as at the beginning of the season (was 17 on standard scoring cheat sheet).

 

I think this is the issue some of us see, players we think should be upgrade/downgrade don't move much or at all.

 

I know it is mostly guesswork and not an exact science, so I don't expect a high order of accuracy. Maybe it takes a lot of change to move some players based on their original ranking.

I completely disagree on the game play angle ... so much goes into a game plan that any given week it can wildly change based on matchups, in-game injuries, in-game adjustments, game flow, etc. Never as easy as "what you see is what you get" from a box score or a carry split.

 

It's all weighted judgment calls, really, so there will be a lot of "agree to disagree" situations throughout the year.

 

As I've written both here and in the article itself, I took over rankings David created. Many of those players have been left where he ranked them (give or take, relative to those around them moving) out of respect to the long haul and our small sample size. We're taking notable movement, first of all. I'm unlikely to move a guy from 17 to 19 because I like him two spots less than David's original projection. I think adding tiers would be helpful.

[Rekroot]

I'm a little surprised by Latavius Murrays percentage of running back touches. For one Murray really doesn't have any competition by the other rookie running backs. They are not at Murrays level. Two, Jack Del Rio typically will typically have a bell cow back much like MJD was in Jax. I still believe Murray

will dominate carries and as defenses wear down he will get better.

 

What's your take Cory? Are you picking up Perkins now? Would you hedge on Lynch for weeks four and five? Do you see Dixon getting the carries right away like Ray Rice did when McGahee and McClain were in front of him. I just can't see West and Forsett being much competition.

[squirrelmastr21]

I like the idea of tiers.

 

I also think a good idea would be to have a thread where we could discuss the rankings. I like hearing others opinions as I think there is a lot "wisdom in the crowd". As in that group thought may actually better than any one persons opinion.

[Cory J. Bonini]

I like the idea of tiers.

 

I also think a good idea would be to have a thread where we could discuss the rankings. I like hearing others opinions as I think there is a lot "wisdom in the crowd". As in that group thought may actually better than any one persons opinion.

If the crowd wants to discuss situations pertaining to the rankings in this thread, I'm all for it ... I cannot guarantee that any or all will be used on my part, but I'm all ears.

[Cory J. Bonini]

I'm a little surprised by Latavius Murrays percentage of running back touches. For one Murray really doesn't have any competition by the other rookie running backs. They are not at Murrays level. Two, Jack Del Rio typically will typically have a bell cow back much like MJD was in Jax. I still believe Murray

will dominate carries and as defenses wear down he will get better.

 

What's your take Cory? Are you picking up Perkins now? Would you hedge on Lynch for weeks four and five? Do you see Dixon getting the carries right away like Ray Rice did when McGahee and McClain were in front of him. I just can't see West and Forsett being much competition.

Perkins has to be in the mix. I'm not super high on his potential, but he must be added to rosters. Darkwa and eventually Jennings should be the primary guys.

 

Lynch?

 

I think there is a lot to be said for Trestman and Harbaugh being extremely loyal to veteran players Forsett will be given a very long leash.

[stevegrab]

Cory,

 

Appreciate all the responses, and your honesty about how you're handling things. I get the respect for DMD's initial rankings, and the small sample size. Just seems odd to see a player like Latavius who I expected to do more and be the primary guy not dropping any after 3 weeks even though he seems to be far less valuable. (Went from a sure starter on my roster to sitting in some situations.)

 

It seems that only injury or near elimination from play can move a player down in some cases.

[Cory J. Bonini]

Cory,

 

Appreciate all the responses, and your honesty about how you're handling things. I get the respect for DMD's initial rankings, and the small sample size. Just seems odd to see a player like Latavius who I expected to do more and be the primary guy not dropping any after 3 weeks even though he seems to be far less valuable. (Went from a sure starter on my roster to sitting in some situations.)

 

It seems that only injury or near elimination from play can move a player down in some cases.

No, that's not the case. Murray is ranked 15th in the ROS rankings. In non-PPR, he sits 15th overall among RBs, and he's 14th in PPR. Three TDs in three games is keeping him afloat, but it's not like Washington and Richard are lighting the world afire. Perhaps your preseason valuation of Murray was a tad too high? He's right about where he should be ... high-end RB2 who will stumble here and there. He's still the best running back option in Oakland for them and fantasy owners.

 

Oakland's offense will face some tough matchups, so I'll grant you that, but nothing that has happened to date in this backfield warrants making a notable change.

[squirrelmastr21]

My last complaint is Javorious Allen who has been inactive all 3 weeks.