cafes predictions bunk

[noobscoob]

the thing about defense rankings, is that they're all relative. in the case of joey harrington this week, he's sucked ass in the recent history of the last couple weeks. i'm just staying predictions with respect to trends are usually more reliable than predictions with respect to rankings. any peeps agree/disagree?

[Ricky_Christ]

All right, that's kind of a loaded statement. First thing, no one here is a fortune teller. We're working in numbers and probabilities. That being said...

It seems that the main thrust of your statement is that it's better to make predictions based on the 1) recent performance of players (trends), rather than based on 2) Defense & player position rankings.

My response to that is that any good analysis of how a specific player will perform has to be based on a combination of those. You have to consider the player you're starting, how they've been doing recently, and the matchup that their team is facing.

If you prefer to think of it in terms of "trends", defensive rankings are really nothing more than the trend of a defensive unit in stopping a specific aspect of the offenses they face. If a defense has been very succesful in stuffing the run all year, odds are Julius Jones isn't going to be the guy to break that trend, regardless of how he's performed recently. You really have to take both into account, then make the decision based on that.

Obviously there are a lot of other factors that enter into the old Start/Sit equation, but unless you're talking about a stud (never sit your studs!), you can't afford to ignore defensive rankings for one of your player's opponents, regardless of how well he's been doing recently.

[noobscoob]

yea i hear what you are saying and agree with it in full; and i'm not saying ignore the rankings in any way, just saying that its worth questioning this kind of statement:

"Harrington may not be very dependable right now, but playing against the Indianapolis Colts is a matchup you should look to exploit. The Colts even let Bears QB Craig Krenzel throw for a season high 175 yards and a score"

passign rankings being an instance of trend can be understood as such; looking at the offenses which the colts defenses have faced:

NE
TEN
GB
JAC
OAK
JAC
KC
HOU
MIN
CHI

who sucks on this list? maybe oakland, and chicago. oakland 'torched' the 'porous' defense for 245 yards and one score. chicago had a whopping 175 yards and one score. i'm just saying don't hesitant to think outside of any form of box, don't get locked into viewing certain defenses as a porous money shot

[Ricky_Christ]

I definitely agree with not becoming too rank dependant. The Eagles are actually a good example of that. After getting run over in their only loss, they came back with a much tighter rush D to prevent it from happening again. However, they're still very low on most rush D lists.

We agree!