snoop2 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Last week, in the player predictions Rivers was pegged for 1TD and I think 250 yards or so. This week, in predictions talking Rivers. Philip Rivers comes off a season high 354 yards and two scores in New Orleans (where everyone has a season high). The huddle was high on Flacco last week with the prediction of 3TD's and close to 300 yards. Well KC only gives up 205 yards per game but has given up 10TD's thus far. Also, Flacco is pretty average on the road. Surprising that Rivers wasn't ranked much higher, if I remember correctly he buried down the list as a fringe starter. I would have thought Rivers would have had a much higher ranking based on his match up with the Saints. Needless to say it is water under the bridge now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Hindsight, isn't it grand 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I am not clear why we are mixing Flacco and Rivers. The difference in the Saints game was that I expected more rushing yardage (actually nailed Mathews with 80-1 but had Battle with 60-1 from the mess going into the game) and Robert Meachem had his only game of any measure as a Charger when he caught a 44-yard TD and Brown/Mathews combined for 127 yards as receivers. Less rushing than expected and more success passing where it had never been before. I mean Gates only had 19 yards in the game. Rivers had not passed for more than 230 yards in a road game and that was in Oakland. In a nutshell, less rushing than the previous stats suggested and way more success with Meachem and Brown/Mathews as receivers instead. As for Flacco, He threw for 299+ yards in 3 of 4 games and faced a defense that had a allowed multiple TDs in every game this year. Matt Ryan had 299-3 there in KC. Brees threw 240-3 vs KC. We projected 280-3. With a final score of 9-6 you cannot expect the stats to line up that well when the Chiefs defense had allowed opponents to score 40, 35, 24 and 37 points against them. It was clearly a game where the Ravens tried to take the week off and those are really hard to call - particularly in such an extreme case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennykravitz2004 Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 You could always try this site. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 I found a website that is 100% accurate 100% of the time with their fantasy predictions. It costs $2000 a week and you have to be a 33rd level Freemason to join. Interested? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 (edited) This is a pretty reasonable question, to be honest. NO is a bottom 5 pass D, whereas KC is a top 10 pass D. Given that there probably isn't a wide margin between Flacco's and Rivers' ability, those factors ought to make a significant impact in recommendations - and that doesn't go to hindsight. Rather than ridicule or sniping, some rationale like David provided might be appropriate. Of course, I seemingly tend to weigh D matchups more most. I firmly believe that the predictability and consistency of an entire unit can be a lot more accurately evaluated than that of an individual on any given week. Edited October 10, 2012 by Bronco Billy 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snoop2 Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share Posted October 10, 2012 I am not clear why we are mixing Flacco and Rivers. The difference in the Saints game was that I expected more rushing yardage (actually nailed Mathews with 80-1 but had Battle with 60-1 from the mess going into the game) and Robert Meachem had his only game of any measure as a Charger when he caught a 44-yard TD and Brown/Mathews combined for 127 yards as receivers. Less rushing than expected and more success passing where it had never been before. I mean Gates only had 19 yards in the game. Rivers had not passed for more than 230 yards in a road game and that was in Oakland. In a nutshell, less rushing than the previous stats suggested and way more success with Meachem and Brown/Mathews as receivers instead. As for Flacco, He threw for 299+ yards in 3 of 4 games and faced a defense that had a allowed multiple TDs in every game this year. Matt Ryan had 299-3 there in KC. Brees threw 240-3 vs KC. We projected 280-3. With a final score of 9-6 you cannot expect the stats to line up that well when the Chiefs defense had allowed opponents to score 40, 35, 24 and 37 points against them. It was clearly a game where the Ravens tried to take the week off and those are really hard to call - particularly in such an extreme case. I understand, though this week it was stated how everyone has career highs against the saints though Rivers was given such a low confidence level for last week. I was surprised the by comment. I was choosing between the 2 QB's last week, and based on other sites and info the huddle had a drastically different prediction than most. (which is why I like the huddle) I understand hindsight is grand, but given Flacco's inability to play his position on the road, certainly will sway my decision moving forward on Flacco. Predicting fantasy football can be a thankless job, though I think Rivers was undersold last week. That said, of course it is up to the owner to pull the trigger on who to start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rattsass Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 This is a pretty reasonable question, to be honest. NO is a bottom 5 pass D, whereas KC is a top 10 pass D. Given that there probably isn't a wide margin between Flacco's and Rivers' ability, those factors ought to make a significant impact in recommendations - and that doesn't go to hindsight. Rather than ridicule or sniping, some rationale like David provided might be appropriate. Its DMD's job to be appropriate. Its my job to be a smartass. Just like its your job to tell everybody they are wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Its DMD's job to be appropriate. Its my job to be a smartass. Just like its your job to tell everybody they are wrong. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big Country Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Its DMD's job to be appropriate. Its my job to be a smartass. Just like its your job to tell everybody they are wrong. See, small businesses like the Huddle are job creators. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 (edited) You could always try this site. ETA Its DMD's job to be appropriate. Its my job to be a smartass. Just like its your job to tell everybody they are wrong. Edited October 10, 2012 by rajncajn Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Its DMD's job to be appropriate. Its my job to be a smartass. Just like its your job to tell everybody they are wrong. Hey, Rat, you can say "dick" on here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Hey, Rat, you can say "dick" on here. If he calls David a dick, he'll get fired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 If he calls David a dick, he'll get fired. Not touching that one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atlas Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Just like its your job to tell everybody they are wrong. I thought that was my ex-wife's job. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 (edited) This is a pretty reasonable question, to be honest. NO is a bottom 5 pass D, whereas KC is a top 10 pass D. Given that there probably isn't a wide margin between Flacco's and Rivers' ability, those factors ought to make a significant impact in recommendations - and that doesn't go to hindsight. Rather than ridicule or sniping, some rationale like David provided might be appropriate. Of course, I seemingly tend to weigh D matchups more most. I firmly believe that the predictability and consistency of an entire unit can be a lot more accurately evaluated than that of an individual on any given week. but it does...reason being is that the numbers you just listed were all in play BEFORE the games were played last week...however, the callout is happening after the games were played and the projections proved to be off...hindsight at it's best...had he posted this up prior to the games being played then it would have been a value non-hindsight point to make. Edited October 10, 2012 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 but it does...reason being is that the numbers you just listed were all in play BEFORE the games were played last week...however, the callout is happening after the games were played and the projections proved to be off...hindsight at it's best...had he posted this up prior to the games being played then it would have been a value non-hindsight point to make. The he'd get in trouble for posting paid content. Okay, I'll concede that, but probably still worthy of discussion (not the hindsight part, but the evaluation process). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 (edited) The he'd get in trouble for posting paid content. Okay, I'll concede that, but probably still worthy of discussion (not the hindsight part, but the evaluation process). Did I just get you to admit you were wrong in almost a twitteresque 140 characters? Edited October 10, 2012 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 10, 2012 Share Posted October 10, 2012 Did I just get you to admit you were wrong in almost a twitteresque 140 characters? I'm wrong a lot more than I'd like, and I'm not afraid to own it too, GB. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 (edited) I'm wrong a lot more than I'd like, and I'm not afraid to own it too, GB. it was the 140ish characters that got me Edited October 11, 2012 by keggerz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bronco Billy Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 it was the 140ish charcters that got me Wait. What just happened here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh 0ne Posted October 11, 2012 Share Posted October 11, 2012 Its DMD's job to be appropriate. Its my job to be a smartass. Just like its your job to tell everybody they are wrong. :chuckle: 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.