1fastdoc Posted November 11, 2019 Author Share Posted November 11, 2019 2 hours ago, stevegrab said: Wow so Yahoo was wrong and everybody else predicting almost nothing from this guy were right? Other than Mixon there really isn't a Bengal player worth starting, at least not against a decent defense. The oddity here is that Yahoo was predicting good production from this guy when Rotowire didn't even bother to rank him. And Yahoo was right 3 weeks in a row, while every other site was wrong. The guy had 22 pts (PPG) week 7. It's the first time I've seen Yahoo be so radically different from every other site AND correct. I was just wondering what Yahoo was basing that on and was there something they used in their algorithm that differed from others. They got it wrong this week but then again, plenty of studs tanked too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted November 11, 2019 Share Posted November 11, 2019 1 hour ago, 1fastdoc said: The oddity here is that Yahoo was predicting good production from this guy when Rotowire didn't even bother to rank him. And Yahoo was right 3 weeks in a row, while every other site was wrong. The guy had 22 pts (PPG) week 7. It's the first time I've seen Yahoo be so radically different from every other site AND correct. I was just wondering what Yahoo was basing that on and was there something they used in their algorithm that differed from others. They got it wrong this week but then again, plenty of studs tanked too. I've long ignored fantasy info from main stream sites like ESPN, Yahoo, CBS Sports etc. so I was just poking fun at taking them seriously. I suppose everybody can be right at some point, I sure know that even the best can be wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1fastdoc Posted November 11, 2019 Author Share Posted November 11, 2019 2 hours ago, stevegrab said: I've long ignored fantasy info from main stream sites like ESPN, Yahoo, CBS Sports etc. so I was just poking fun at taking them seriously. I suppose everybody can be right at some point, I sure know that even the best can be wrong. I'm not sure who's worse, the ESPN pundits, meteorologists or that really loud stock guy. The older I get the more I realize that they're on TV not because they're good at predicting stuff, but rather they're good at making their opinions sound convincing. In FF, I read the expert advice and then go with my own analysis. I swear my success rate is much better than any of theirs but then, I'm only analyzing a couple dozen players and scenarios, not hundreds. I did get it wrong with Rodgers and also the Giants D this week. What a manure show on both accounts. And I guess I should have played Erickson over Johnson. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted November 11, 2019 Share Posted November 11, 2019 19 minutes ago, 1fastdoc said: I'm not sure who's worse, the ESPN pundits, meteorologists or that really loud stock guy. The older I get the more I realize that they're on TV not because they're good at predicting stuff, but rather they're good at making their opinions sound convincing. In FF, I read the expert advice and then go with my own analysis. I swear my success rate is much better than any of theirs but then, I'm only analyzing a couple dozen players and scenarios, not hundreds. I did get it wrong with Rodgers and also the Giants D this week. What a manure show on both accounts. And I guess I should have played Erickson over Johnson. Meteorologists get a bad wrap, they do the best the can predicting things that change easily and have a lot of variables. If they all covered SoCal they could just put up the "sunny and 70s" forecast and go on vacation. I've found the local TV weather to be very helpful, they have knowledgeable people who don't try to create a story and provide sound info. The loud stock guy, Jim Kramer? I've wondered if he has sound info or not, I don't buy stocks or pay attention to individual companies much, but I've seen his show (was always on at the gym in the past) and he sounds like a carnival barker, and feels like Howard Stern for stocks, all these props and sounds, like its more entertainment than financial info. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1fastdoc Posted November 11, 2019 Author Share Posted November 11, 2019 12 minutes ago, stevegrab said: Meteorologists get a bad wrap, they do the best the can predicting things that change easily and have a lot of variables. If they all covered SoCal they could just put up the "sunny and 70s" forecast and go on vacation. I've found the local TV weather to be very helpful, they have knowledgeable people who don't try to create a story and provide sound info. The loud stock guy, Jim Kramer? I've wondered if he has sound info or not, I don't buy stocks or pay attention to individual companies much, but I've seen his show (was always on at the gym in the past) and he sounds like a carnival barker, and feels like Howard Stern for stocks, all these props and sounds, like its more entertainment than financial info. That's the one. His "speculative" suggestions usually come after some strong positive predictors, which have already been exploited by those knowledgeable in the field - namely top fund managers. By the time Jim covers it, it's a lower risk but much lower reward proposition. 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.