ECK Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) I don't understand how it's possible for one website to have both of these things written out: From the Week 1 Projections: Opp RuYD RuTD Rec ReYD ReTD PaYD PaTD Int FF Pts ConFac QB Cam Newton, CAR @TB 50 1 0 0 0 230 2 1 30.50 http://www.thehuddle...blk-sm.gif[/img] Cam may not own the Bucs, but he certainly has a lease with an option to buy: over the past six meetings Newton is averaging 235 passing yards, 45 rushing yards, one rushing score and almost two passing scores per contest. Nothing has changed so much as to lead us to believe Newton isn't in store for another typical ruining of the Tampa D again this week. From a player update: Cam Newton - QB - Carolina Panthers Posted 9/3/14 10:30pm ETThe Carolina Panthers are confident QB Cam Newton (ribs) will be ready to go in the team's Week 1 game. Newton was sore Wednesday, Sept. 3, after throwing Monday Sept. 1.Huddle Up: Newton won't be 100 percent and he has a bad matchup against a tough Tampa Bay defense on Sunday. Cam is a low-end QB1 for Week 1. These two assessments are 100% contradictory of each other. I don't understand how the same website (a paid service) can publish both of these things on the same day. Edited September 4, 2014 by ECK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dope man Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 You have to make your own decisions and own them, do you expect every huddle staff member to have the same opinion??? The fact is that Cam comes with a lot of risk this year because of his ankle and his cracked rib.....who knows??? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Simple and its been covered many times before, different people with different opinions. Would you prefer a web site that has 6 guys all saying the same thing? There used to be an article on Friday comparing some of those where they (DMD and ???) had different opinions with more detailed explanation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECK Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 I would prefer the site to have some sort of unity in determining player rankings. I understand there are different opinions being thrown around. But to have a player update that says a low end QB1, meanwhile the player rankings that are being published for the same website have him listed as the number 1 QB for the week; I think that could get a little confusing for someone trying to see what his site that he paid for endorses. Obviously dope man, you make your own lineup decisions and live with them. This isn't my first rodeo in fantasy, but being that it is week 1 and the website you subscribe to offers insight that land on opposite ends of the spectrum, I think it warrants a head scratch or 2. stevegrab, like I stated earlier in this post, I do like differing points of view. Just think that maybe they should all come up with a consensus on where they like guys in the player rankings. If Newton was ranked at number 4 or 5 in the QB rankings then this post would have never even been made. But naming him as the number one QB for the week is where I get the urge to call out the discrepancy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dope man Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Man, the fact is that there has been a thousand different opinions about Cam....and none of them are the same. I live just outside Charlotte and I purposely avoided him. Best of luck to you with him, I hope he does well because I am a Panthers fan, but I really don't think he will this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECK Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 I mean it's a 2 QB league which is why I pulled the trigger on him and I can start someone else (don't want to get into a Who Do I Start on here), but when he's listed as number 1 it makes you think twice before benching him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Pick the analyst you like and go with his projections. Each individual has their own idea/opinion of how things will play out. Each individual arrived at their projections in their own way ... why would you want them to compromise their methods to blend projections? 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJW Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Not quite sure I'm getting this one. First, you're comparing two different things - the weekly projections and player analysis with a news blurb. So the guy covering the news at that moment has the opinion Cam's a low QB1, and our analyst doing the projections has the opinion Cam's a high QB1. Okay... so start him. Seems simple to me and far from "100% contradictory." 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECK Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 Pick the analyst you like and go with his projections. Each individual has their own idea/opinion of how things will play out. Each individual arrived at their projections in their own way ... why would you want them to compromise their methods to blend projections? Is there a way to look at each analysts projections? I am honestly asking the question. When I look under the IN-SEASON tab it says that the Weekly Player Rankings are published on Wednesdays by Dorey. Then it says that on the Start Bench Tool is published on Thursdays by Dorey, Tuvey, and Gallo. From what I can tell, the Start Bench Tool is in the same order as the Weekly Player Rankings which I am assuming means that these are Dorey's rankings, and then maybe Tuvey and Gallo help to write the comments underneath the players? My point being is I do not see where I can access everyone else's rankings. So the rankings that are posted are speaking for the entire website, so when there are player updates with insight that directly contradicts the insight of the player rankings it causes me to question things. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bree22 Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Pick the analyst you like and go with his projections. Each individual has their own idea/opinion of how things will play out. Each individual arrived at their projections in their own way ... why would you want them to compromise their methods to blend projections? +1 find the one you agree with or believe in and follow their opinion. Again better to have more opinions then less in my book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECK Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 Not sure how nobody else questions this, but it seems as though I am alone on this topic. If I am, then sorry to have questioned how the analysis is presented... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECK Posted September 4, 2014 Author Share Posted September 4, 2014 Not quite sure I'm getting this one. First, you're comparing two different things - the weekly projections and player analysis with a news blurb. So the guy covering the news at that moment has the opinion Cam's a low QB1, and our analyst doing the projections has the opinion Cam's a high QB1. Okay... so start him. Seems simple to me and far from "100% contradictory." 100% contradictory meaning low end QB1 to the number one ranked QB. They are opposite ends. How can I tell who is the guy who's covering the news at the moment? Because without being able to tell who's giving me what information, how am I supposed to pick an analyst and follow him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WJW Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 Well IMHO QB1 is QB1. Not quite sure I'm getting how high vs. low is a sin above all FF sins as you are treating it. But to each his own. Our weekly offensive projections are done by David Dorey. IDP by Steve Gallo. John Tuvey adds his analysis to the mix to produce what you see in the Start Bench Tool. We have a variety of guys covering the news, and for the most part you'll find the "Huddle Up" there consistent with rest of the site. We project and analyze around 400 players a week. I think you're focusing on a single player and blowing the situation a bit out of proportion. But hey, you're entitled to do just that if you wish. I think the reaction you're getting however should maybe make you reconsider. Long live Heisenberg! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripleshot Posted September 4, 2014 Share Posted September 4, 2014 (edited) The different projections are actually in your favor. The first analysis lists Cam's historical performance against the Bucs as the reason for his belief in Cam this weekend. The second analysis lists current conditions(his ribs) as to why his expectations are tempered a little. Where you benefit is not in having two predictions that are the same but in having two perspectives as to why the analysts predict what they do. It's then up to you to consider all the perspectives and decide for yourself how much each one influences performance, otherwise there is always the ESPN Fantasy Lineup Advisor tool. Edited September 4, 2014 by Tripleshot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DMD Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Starting in week two, if the projections/game writeups differ that I do seem to differ with John Tuvery's start bench stuff, we are reprising the "Upon Further Review" where we further discuss players that we have multiple requests about. You will find great commonality over the site but by no means always the same. News is news, but it is John and I with our recommendations about starts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ECK Posted September 5, 2014 Author Share Posted September 5, 2014 Don't get me wrong, I still love this site, especially because you guys go out on a limb more than others....for example actually having the guts to make Cam the number 1 ranked QB for the week. I've been a member for a few years now and I really haven't had a problem with anything before. Part of my stubbornness on this topic was because I was getting reactions that made me sound like I start my players based on projections alone. I probably held onto the argument for too long though haha. The "Upon Further Review" article sounds cool though and is something I would look forward to for sure. Long live Heisenberg! Hell Yeah!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Would love to see Upon Further Review again. Like ECK, I think that a little point counter point on key players with radically different predictions would be very useful as it helps to clarify WHY each of you guys sees the situation a certain way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phillypb Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 How have these "out-on-a-limb" projections fared over the years? I'm actually curious, as a subscriber for all of 10 days. Still getting my feet wet. Props to the analyst for the cojones to project newton as #1 QB this week, just 2 days ago. But ya gotta be right about that type of thing a lot more than you're wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lennykravitz2004 Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) How have these "out-on-a-limb" projections fared over the years? I'm actually curious, as a subscriber for all of 10 days. Still getting my feet wet. Props to the analyst for the cojones to project newton as #1 QB this week, just 2 days ago. But ya gotta be right about that type of thing a lot more than you're wrong. I've won my local twice in the 5 years I've subscribed, never once before that since (you guessed it) 2004 when I started FFB. For whatever that's worth. ETA: obviously it starts with a solid draft, but throughout the year, getting solid info first can be HUGH. Also, this site has been a great tool for me to develop a (my own) thought process for identifying things about players - both to target for picking up and staying away from. Edited September 5, 2014 by lennykravitz2004 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanTheMan_5 Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Starting in week two, if the projections/game writeups differ that I do seem to differ with John Tuvery's start bench stuff, we are reprising the "Upon Further Review" where we further discuss players that we have multiple requests about. You will find great commonality over the site but by no means always the same. News is news, but it is John and I with our recommendations about starts. Love the Upon Further Review articles. I also very much appreciate that you don't all agree to come to the same conclusions. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 'Out on a limb' not the best choice of words. More like under the radar. Huddle guys are good at identifying specific player vs player or scheme vs sceme matchups that cam be exploited. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripleshot Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Could be worse, we could have Darin and Stevegrab writing start/bench recommendations every week. The weekly Upon Further Review article would be 20k words long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DanTheMan_5 Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Could be worse, we could have Darin and Stevegrab writing start/bench recommendations every week. The weekly Upon Further Review article would be 20k words long. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 (edited) Starting in week two, if the projections/game writeups differ that I do seem to differ with John Tuvery's start bench stuff, we are reprising the "Upon Further Review" where we further discuss players that we have multiple requests about. You will find great commonality over the site but by no means always the same. News is news, but it is John and I with our recommendations about starts. I also would expect a small downgrade in his stats for this weekend if you have concern about his injury, which seems to be the key reason that the news story has him as "low end QB1". Could be worse, we could have Darin and Stevegrab writing start/bench recommendations every week. The weekly Upon Further Review article would be 20k words long. Hmm, seems I've developed a reputation here...keeping it short Part of my stubbornness on this topic was because I was getting reactions that made me sound like I start my players based on projections alone. I probably held onto the argument for too long though haha. You're relatively new or at least not a frequent poster here. Every year there's many threads from newer members complaining about some things, including "why does this page say this, while this other page says something different". It is usually from people that expect to read a page and set their line-up. That is why you got some of those responses. Some of the more abusive members are no longer around, it was a lot worse back then. Edited September 5, 2014 by stevegrab Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tripleshot Posted September 5, 2014 Share Posted September 5, 2014 Hmm, seems I've developed a reputation here...keeping it short LOL, no offense intended there Steve. I just think an Upon Further Review with you and Darin would be epic as you two historically present the best cases for your opinions here. And maybe I'm griefing you a Darin just a tad. 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.