Flaws in other websites player projections - Fantasy Football Cafe 2014 Fantasy Football Cafe


Return to Football Talk

Flaws in other websites player projections

Moderator: Football Moderators

Flaws in other websites player projections

Postby Flux » Wed Aug 11, 2004 3:48 pm

Ive looked at many projections on different websites and ive noticed a really weird trend (well maybe not weird, but inconsistent)


When I look at some of the rankings I see a lot of players normally lower than where I would project them. These guys are usually the possible RBBC candidates such as (TJ, Garner, Staley, KJ, JJ, George, Martin, etc).

I dont have a problem w/ them ranked low, but when you look at their projections you see stats of like 600-700 yds rushing a couple hundred receiving and maybe 5 TDs.

So those obviously arent great stats, and whats the first thing that comes to my mind? Well if they arent getting a ton of yards, surely there backups are. Then you go and look at the backups and often times they are around 200-400 yds and a few TDs themselves.

So combined, these teams are only putting up 1000 yds and like 8-10 TDs? That makes absolutely no sense to me. I mean I know that often times projections are total BS, but at least be consistent.

I guess I just wanted to rant and let everyone know not to put a ton of emphasis in player projections from sites when the numbers just dont add up
Image
Flux
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6113
Joined: 7 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby DUKE » Wed Aug 11, 2004 3:55 pm

I'm assuming you're referring to "overall" rankings, and I agree with you. That's why you have to take into consideration of trends in your draft, roster specifications, etc. rather than just pick straight off of a top 200 list. Doing this will get you either a kicker or backup TE too early :-D .
DUKE
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Cafe RankerInnovative Member
Posts: 3173
Joined: 24 Oct 2002
Home Cafe: Football

Postby Flux » Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:01 pm

DUKE wrote:I'm assuming you're referring to "overall" rankings, and I agree with you. That's why you have to take into consideration of trends in your draft, roster specifications, etc. rather than just pick straight off of a top 200 list. Doing this will get you either a kicker or backup TE too early :-D .


watchoutalkingbout DUKE :-b

Maybe my post is completely unclear and im an idiot. I also should have used an example and used 'projections' instead of rankings


Ok heres an example

I look at website X which has player projections

It has

Charlie Garner w/ 600 yds rushing, 300 rec and 4 TDs

then

Mike Alstott w/ 400 yds rushing 200 rec and 5 TDs


No other TB RB is on the list of the top say 50 RBs

So to me, these projectionists are thinking that TB will only rush for 1000 yds and 9 TDs

DET last year was pitiful and still managed 1300+ yds


Im just saying that if these projectors looked at the big picture, they would see they are doing some ridiculous things
Image
Flux
Mod in Retirement
Mod in Retirement

User avatar
CafeholicFantasy ExpertCafe RankerMock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly WinnerMatchup Meltdown SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly WinnerLucky Ladders Weekly Winner
Posts: 6113
Joined: 7 Jul 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Postby atvjerryrice80 » Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:27 pm

yes i see what you are saying, but im thinking that they assume you are adding the other RB's on the team into the equation w/o them doing it for you
Image
atvjerryrice80
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1279
Joined: 23 Oct 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: Helping the 49ers look for replacements

Postby BigMusky » Wed Aug 11, 2004 4:39 pm

projections are a complete waste. How does anyone know how many yards someone is going to get.
BigMusky
Head Coach
Head Coach

User avatar

Posts: 1258
Joined: 17 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: "Milla-walk-ay"

Postby Amazinz » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:08 pm

BigMusky wrote:projections are a complete waste. How does anyone know how many yards someone is going to get.

Projections aren't a waste. When you rank players in a cheat sheet you're making projections. Projected statistics are just carrying it out one step further.
Image
Amazinz
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 2552
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby Paladyr » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:15 pm

atvjerryrice80 wrote:yes i see what you are saying, but im thinking that they assume you are adding the other RB's on the team into the equation w/o them doing it for you


yea but it still doesn't add up.

They are just being cautious. I'm sure most of them don't even think about the total rushing yards a team should get and THEN figure out what the individual players will do.
Paladyr
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar

Posts: 2454
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football
Location: wallowing in my own crapulence

Postby Amazinz » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:17 pm

FootballGuys takes it into account and some others do too. IMO if this isn't taken into account then the projections are seriously flawed and just about useless.
Image
Amazinz
General Manager
General Manager

User avatar
Mock(ing) DrafterEagle EyePick 3 Weekly Winner
Posts: 2552
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Home Cafe: Baseball

Postby ironman » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:26 pm

Flux wrote:
DUKE wrote:I'm assuming you're referring to "overall" rankings, and I agree with you. That's why you have to take into consideration of trends in your draft, roster specifications, etc. rather than just pick straight off of a top 200 list. Doing this will get you either a kicker or backup TE too early :-D .


watchoutalkingbout DUKE :-b

Maybe my post is completely unclear and im an idiot. I also should have used an example and used 'projections' instead of rankings


Ok heres an example

I look at website X which has player projections

It has

Charlie Garner w/ 600 yds rushing, 300 rec and 4 TDs

then

Mike Alstott w/ 400 yds rushing 200 rec and 5 TDs


No other TB RB is on the list of the top say 50 RBs

So to me, these projectionists are thinking that TB will only rush for 1000 yds and 9 TDs

DET last year was pitiful and still managed 1300+ yds


Im just saying that if these projectors looked at the big picture, they would see they are doing some ridiculous things


My guess is they are factoring in Michael Pittman to get a bulk of yards too, but that wouldn't explain why he's not listed in the top 50.

From what I've seen sites have Pittman and Garner both getting between 500-600 yards each and Alstott around 300. They are projecting based on what is known right now. If for whatever reason Garner blows away Pittman this preseason or vice versa the projections will eventually adjust for that.
Image
ironman
Offensive Coordinator
Offensive Coordinator

User avatar
Cafe RankerPick 3 Weekly WinnerSweet 16 SurvivorCafe Blackjack Weekly Winner
Posts: 805
(Past Year: 1)
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Home Cafe: Baseball
Location: Dubuque

Postby KingGhidra » Wed Aug 11, 2004 5:36 pm

Amazinz wrote:FootballGuys takes it into account and some others do too. IMO if this isn't taken into account then the projections are seriously flawed and just about useless.


I know Ian Allan at fantasyfootballindex.com (not the Giants OL) does just that. He projects team yards and assigns them on a % basis to individual players.
KingGhidra
General Manager
General Manager

Cafe RankerMock(ing) Drafter
Posts: 4303
Joined: 3 Sep 2003
Home Cafe: Football

Next

Return to Football Talk

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests

Forums Articles & Tips Start & Sit Sleepers Rankings Leagues


Get Ready...
The 2014 NFL season kicks off in 21:14 hours
(and 44 days)
2014 NFL Schedule


  • Fantasy Football
  • Article Submissions
  • Privacy Statement
  • Site Survey 
  • Contact