2018 Running Back Report

[Dynasty DeLorean]

I appreciate the write up, and I got crap for people in my league for my huge support of Kerryon Johnson and my hate of rojo and penny. I took Kerryon at #10 by trading up and would of drafted him at 1.2 if I had that pick and unable to trade back. I think Penny will be a bust and watched every single Kerryon game in college being an Auburn fan. Meanwhile last year I drafted Kizer thinking he would become something and he was the epitome of a "Turd Sandwich" (luckily took Mahomes in the top 10).

KJ @ 1.02

[MEuRaH]

And if I recall correctly I did set a goal for Turd Sandwich in which I will stop calling him that if he hits it.

I'd be more interested if you said you'd *eat* a turn sandwich if be "hits".

You got a deal. I will eat a turn sandwich if he hits.

What defines as "hits"? 1000 yards rushing this year?

[MEuRaH]

I appreciate the write up, and I got crap for people in my league for my huge support of Kerryon Johnson and my hate of rojo and penny. I took Kerryon at #10 by trading up and would of drafted him at 1.2 if I had that pick and unable to trade back. I think Penny will be a bust and watched every single Kerryon game in college being an Auburn fan. Meanwhile last year I drafted Kizer thinking he would become something and he was the epitome of a "Turd Sandwich" (luckily took Mahomes in the top 10).

KJ @ 1.02

I took KJ @ 1.03. Proof (I'm 49ers, double copy league): http://www65.myfantasyleague.com/2018/o ... 48454&O=17

The other copy didn't get drafted for another 9 selections.

[JSylvester87]

I’d take KJ at 1.2 because I really liked his style and determination to actually learn and get better. Who else would I have wanted after Barkley? It was a crapshoot of guys where nobody stuck out. As I said, I think Penny is going to be a huge bust and tons of people pegged him at 1.2. Also Guice is a moron who I want no shares of. Add an ACL injury to that now as well.

[Bot101]

Guice >>> KJ. Sorry Johnson riders. Need more than limited touches to change my opinion. Lamar Miller looked amazing with limited touches. And as a workhorse he couldnt handle it. Give KJ workhorse touches and he will fall apart quicker than most.

[FantasyFreakGuru]

Is Philip Lindsay a thing? ........ or just a one year one hit wonder?

[Pullo Vision]

Is Philip Lindsay a thing? ........ or just a one year one hit wonder?

Let's get to the end of his rookie season before considering it a wonder year.

[Cult of Dionysus]

I'm not gonna keep belaboring this point, but I do want to take one more run at his, because I think it is important. I take issue with the way this report is presented to us as the product of some metric-driven analysis, indeed you expressly refer to a series of "calculations". Yet the report reads like a scouting report.

The situation is even more muddled due to the use of "Tiers", which are not explained in any satisfactory way. How do players fall within a Tier. Do you run different calculations for different types of players (e.g. bellcow versus scat back). Or does your system segregate them automatically based upon a number of criteria?

I understand that you don't want to give away your formulas. No one is asking for that. But I think everyone here would be better served if you could provide (perhaps in 2019 and beyond) a clear metric that reflects the sum of your calculations. Ultimately, if you do run calculations, there must be a final score or perhaps a series of scores that sorts the RBs. I can't see how it would be harmful for you to provide that.

Lastly, scrutiny of a scientific or mathematical model is not only absolutely normal, but essential and healthy. You are putting this forth as a model, and as such you should expect some level of scrutiny and be open to explain reasonable questions about the model, not solely rest on its conclusions. Again, no one is asking for the underlying formulas, just a clearer understanding of what gets spit out.

[UATahoe]

Dude, just quit reading it and move on then if you don’t like it. Quite honestly, DD doesn’t even owe you a response. He does this because he likes to and decided to share it. If you don’t like it, why don’t you go do your own thing your own way? At this point, this argument just comes off as petty.

[Gtdano_14]

At least there is less perceived hostility this go around.

[Pullo Vision]

I've enjoyed reading DD's works- informative and a nice diversion. Definitely appreciate the time he's put into this over the years.

That said, I don't see Cult's points as petty or argumentative. The way the author has put together the prologue suggests an attempt to be measured and calculating. I can understand the author not being interested in revealing the full scope of the methodology used for this, not least because people will grab onto small details, argue about them and use those "flaws" in the method to discredit the entire effort.

But, I think a fuller understanding by the audience of the process and output (including how the tiering system was arrived at) will elevate this from informative diversion to a more deeply- and widely-appreciated study.

[AussieMate]

Dude, just quit reading it and move on then if you don’t like it. Quite honestly, DD doesn’t even owe you a response. He does this because he likes to and decided to share it. If you don’t like it, why don’t you go do your own thing your own way? At this point, this argument just comes off as petty.

Ha, for him to quit reading he would have to start, it's clear he hasn't read the report properly as half his arguements are explained quite clearly. It's not worth anyone's time here to run him through it point by point, so probs time to shelf those thread till the year is over and we have a larger sample size to work with.
This report always turns into chaos, can't wait for next year's though. I'm out

[Dynasty DeLorean]

I'm not gonna keep belaboring this point, but I do want to take one more run at his, because I think it is important. I take issue with the way this report is presented to us as the product of some metric-driven analysis, indeed you expressly refer to a series of "calculations". Yet the report reads like a scouting report.

Could be because I included a scouting report of each player, but i'm just spit-balling here.

[Phaded]

Hahahaha.
I am literally dying here.

[SteveMaddensShoes]

I'm not gonna keep belaboring this point, but I do want to take one more run at his, because I think it is important. I take issue with the way this report is presented to us as the product of some metric-driven analysis, indeed you expressly refer to a series of "calculations". Yet the report reads like a scouting report.

Could be because I included a scouting report of each player, but i'm just spit-balling here.

If I remember correctly he offers his own scouting report on top of the data analysis, not as a combined scoring methodology. He doesn’t add them together per se. And again, I think there are times where he is surprised by player X being in a certain tier or saying if it weren’t for ____(offfield concerns, missed playing time in college, injury, etc) he might be higher or lower in the tiers.

He has also stuck his neck out on a couple players saying they seem better to him than what the data tier system says(Rojo, maybe others I forget).

It’s not a perfect system and it’s not to identify can’t miss prospects, it’s just there to lower the odds of missing.