The Lung wrote:
It's a little disappointing to see that this article is currently only getting 2.6 stars out of 5 from Cafe members. He obviously put a lot of time and effort into this, and the rankings are just as good as any I've seen. In fact, we did a rookie dynasty league draft this weekend and players were going off the board pretty darn close to these rankings. So great job R.J., and boo to those who are rating this article poorly.
I'm guessing people rated it low because they disagreed with the rankings, but that kind of misses point.
What use are other people's rankings if they're the same or very similar to your own? Reading rankings and opinions that differ from your own cause you to challenge them, and the more you debate (even with yourself) on a player's value, the better overall picture you will have, and you will have a more informed opinion on him.
Rating someone's rankings high because they validate ones self and not because they are thought provoking is nothing but **** stroking.Mod edit: language