I propose that we go by the Yahoo Average Draft Position as the ranking of merit. This is obviously the most fair ranking. http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com/f1/372433/draftanalysis
The reason is: this is actually based on reality. It's obvious that the Yahoo player ranker hasn't changed since July, and that is not what we were led to believe when we decided to use it as our guide. I, for one, was expecting Tom Brady's ranking to rise if he looked good in the offseason and preseason. He has, and his ADP has risen accordingly, but his ranking is the same as it was when we first joined the league.
Since it is a 10-team league, we should just go in the order of the player's draft position amongst all of the mock drafts. The 1st round talent would look like this:
1. Adrian Peterson
2. Michael Turner
3. Maurice Jone-Drew
4. Matt Forte
5. Brian Westbrook
6. Deangelo Williams
7. Larry Fitzgerald
8. LaDanian Tomlinson
9. Steven Jackson
10. Drew Brees
2nd Round
11. Frank Gore
12. Brandon Jacobs
13. Chris Johnson
14. Randy Moss
15. Tom Brady
16. Andre Johnson
17. Peyton Manning
18. Clinton Portis
19. Steve Slaton
20. Steve Smith
This at least closely mirrors the Yahoo rankings, but has actually changed to reflect a player's promise.
2018-19 Conference Honors & Awards
7 years ago
Digital,
ReplyDeleteYou forgot to mention that under the system in place you lose a third round pick by keeping Calvin Johnson. By adopting your proposal, you conveniently lose a fourth round pick.
I suppose it's possible that yours is simply a principled argument that you feel compelled to make. If that is the case, I apologize.
By way of full disclosure, I should mention that the system currently in place is more favorable to me. However, I am not totally opposed to the proposed rankings system. I just don't think there is a great injustice taking place under either system.
And one more thing, Digital, how are you not just a tad embarrassed that you are proposing this ranking system (1) weeks after we all seemed to agree on the current system (or at least no one raised any objections to using those rankings at that point in time) and (2) when Calvin Johnson is ranked 21st in your proposed rankings, which is just one spot below Steve Smith? Oh, and for those of you at home not keeping score, Steve Smith is dealing with injury issues, which will most likely drop him below Johnson in the near future but (surprise, surprise) after Digital pushes through his rankings.
Like I said, I'm not totally opposed to switching, but the self-serving nature of the proposal is laughable.
Yours,
Sax
My previous post was a little harsh. I am not in the best of moods currently, so I apologize if anyone read that and felt that it was harsh as well.
ReplyDeleteFor the record, I yesterday offered Brandon a trade of either Chris or Calvin Johnson and my 6th round pick for his 4th round pick and this trade offer still stands. I will gladly give up my 3rd round pick for Mr. Calvin Johnson should Brandon decide to not take me up on my offer. Since I made this chart by hand, I did not even realize where Calvin fell until after it was finished. And finally, one reason I made the trade with Taylor was that I figured the Yahoo rankings would be updated to reflect Tom Brady's increased value as the preseason wore on, which would have bumped Brady ahead of Johnson and put Calvin in the third round anyway.
I would suggest that we go by the Rotowire rankings which are updated daily and are much more in line with the projections Yahoo touts (in fact Yahoo uses Rotowire's material along with fantasyguru as noted on the bottom of their fantasy pages), where Calvin is the 5th placed player, but we are wedded to the Yahoo system.
I think it is a more than a little hypocritical that Ben is suggesting my motives are self-serving while his post is entirely self-serving. Should this proposal place Peyton in the third round, or the fourth round, Ben would have not said anything.
Ben obviously thinks Peyton is worthy of a 2nd round pick as he would not trade me Chris Johnson simply because he felt that one of the players picking from our keeper leftovers would take him. That would suggest that Ben thinks Peyton is as valuable as Chris Johnson, Andre Johnson, and Randy Moss, which is in keeping with the rankings I propose here.
Since Ben was providing presumptuous speculation and even went so far as to call my motives laughable, I will provide some speculation of my own:
I doubt he could honestly say that the standard Yahoo rankings are more accurate than what I proposed. In addition, I doubt he could honestly say that he too was not under the impression that the Yahoo rankings would be updated before the draft.
I didn't like the tone of the post and the speculations that were made.
To the rest of the league, should Brandon not take Calvin Johnson, I will give up my 3rd round pick for him to avoid any confusion regarding my motives for making this suggestion. I think he's 1st round talent anyway.
Digital,
ReplyDeleteI apologize if you didn't like the tone of my post. And, yes, I may be guilty of some presumptuous speculating. However, I think this is the type of speculation you open yourself up to when you propose a change this late in the game -- on an issue that seems settled and when that change clearly benefits your team.
And as to your presumptuous speculation that I would not have spoken to the issue if not for the impact the change would have on Peyton Manning's draft value, I would respond that you must not know me very well. You may recall that I was pretty vocal on the new members of our league coming in on an even playing field. (This despite the fact that, by giving each of them two keepers, I will most likely end up with a less than formidable group of running backs.) You may not buy it, but I honestly would have commented in the same manner if my team was helped by your proposal.
Additionally, as I mentioned in my comment, I truly don't have a strong opinion either way. You suggest that my post is self-serving, but I really don't have a problem with the change you propose. As I said, I don't think a real injustice occurs under either approach.
While I think I've explained the rationale behind my concerns, I do apologize for doubting your motives. And I, for one, certainly wouldn't expect you to give up a later pick than is warranted for Calvin Johnson if, in fact, your proposal is adopted.
As for your harsh post, I missed it. I hope it was above the belt.
The Admiral
I think the different proposed rankings are really six v. a half dozen. I would prefer that we used a system that updated the players as we went along, but none of us had a problem with the current system until the preseason started. I think the Patriots went winless in the preseason before reeling off 18 straight with Tom Brady's man-cock tossing 83 TDs. Because the different ranking systems are ultimately fairly similar, I think it should just be left to the Commissioner to make a determination.
ReplyDeleteAdmiral,
ReplyDeleteMy apologies, from one stubbornly competitive SOB to another. My previous post was above the belt, I assure you. I apologize in particular for suggesting that you would not have spoken out if Peyton had not changed.
I agree that the timing was poor, but as I kept waiting for updates to change and they did not, I grew more concerned. I thought I would give it to the end of the first week of preseason games and still nothing except for points projections updates.
Alas, I could not care one way or the other really. The most egregious injustice is that Westbrook is still projected as first round talent in both rankings that have been suggested here. Either way, it is what it is, and because of the way the keeper league is set up now (based on the mock drafts I have done) I am certain anyone can make up any slights with their picks they don't forfeit in the draft. Or, coming from the guy who had the worst draft in recent memory last year and who didn't end up starting a single player he drafted by halfway through the season, on the waiver wire.