Official/Final 2020 Rookie RB Ranks

[Sriracha]

For me I find it hard to tell the difference when it comes to general quickness vs processing speed, someone can have awesome explosion from the combine but you don't see it on film because they are slow to process and act while others like CEH who I do think is legit 4.6 runner has great processing which makes it look like he is faster on tape than at the combine. Also you get problems like people saying Dobbins was slow because he was run down by Simmons which in context is understandable because Simmons is fast as f**k, I never know enough about opposing teams defenders to judge speed vs opposing dbs or lbs so my views can be way off.
In general I get what you're saying though, for the most part you can at least get a decent idea of someones speed that the combine doesn't fall too far outside the range you had.

Dobbins speed is pretty apparent on film, but he gets caught from behind a lot. You often see him decelerate with an open path to the endzone, which gets him caught by defenders who realistically did not have an angle to catch him; rather than believe he's slow this makes me think he doesn't trust his long speed.

Interesting thoughts on how processing speed might affect how fast players look on film; but I don't think it bothers me that much since I'm looking for isolated plays that showcase their potential instead of common use cases. I'm also not only looking at their speed relative to players, but also in relation to the numbers when they're running down the sideline. Sometimes you get lucky and the player you're looking to time is being chased by a defender with a well known forty time; Shenault vs USC's Taylor-Stuart who has a laser timed 40 time of 4.448 from Rivals fivs-star challenge for instance.

CEH's long speed, while not fast, is definitely serviceable -- Much better than David Montgomery. I'd be surprised if a guy with adequate longspeed and excellent burst is a true 4.6 guy; but I'm definitely not willing to die on a hill about CEH's athleticism

[Hottoddies]

I don’t get why it’s so difficult for people to understand what Mike was trying to achieve with his posts. The first round was film based analysis on pretty much the entire running back class to some degree, outlining strengths / weaknesses with comments on the system they ran in college - a great point of discussion, particularly when there is not much else to discuss at that time of the year.

The next stage was adjusting the ranking post combine for any glaring deficiencies in an athletic profile that didn’t match what was observed on film (ie Hollyfield - people can say what they want but he had quick feet and decent initial burst on film, he was starting over Swift for a reason). There were also some adjustments based on additional film watched / athletic fit to various schemes, once again a great discussion point.

The final stage was adjusting rankings based on landing spot and team fit.

The most interesting discussion for me was during stage one and two. Yes, anyone could prepare rankings post NFL draft and not waste their time with stage one and two - but some people like to watch film and discuss what they see, a novel concept on a dynasty forum in January I know.

I go through a similar process in that I try to watch as much film as I can before the combine and draft to get an unbiased sense of how they preform at the game of football. Great athletes don't necessarily make great football players. I found that Mike's "process" was helpful in that it offered another set off eyes to see things that I may have missed. But at the end of the day we need to take responsibility for our own decisions. And to be fair to Mike's initial view on Holyfield, he did look as if he was a strong decisive runner with skills that could translate to the NFL. His lack of speed wasn't apparent on film.

[OhCruelestRanter]

That some of you scout-cosplayers thought Elijah Holyfield’s film was good is a scathing indictment of the value of watching film with regard to making fantasy decisions.

RE: Mike, my god. This is beyond beating a dead horse. You guys have taken the horse that I killed a month ago, beat it into hamburger meat, shaped it into a horse again, reanimated it, and then killed it again. Mike’s process is irreparably flawed, his results are mediocre, his “persona” is tiresome, and he’s so wounded by even the slightest criticism that he will move the goalposts, explain that he meant something other than he typed, or occasionally just say he was lying to trick a league mate. There’s nothing left to discuss until next year when he undervalues another freak athlete because he doesn’t know what to look for.

Nuke this whole thread from orbit.

[cantguardjake]

That some of you scout-cosplayers thought Elijah Holyfield’s film was good is a scathing indictment of the value of watching film with regard to making fantasy decisions.

RE: Mike, my god. This is beyond beating a dead horse. You guys have taken the horse that I killed a month ago, beat it into hamburger meat, shaped it into a horse again, reanimated it, and then killed it again. Mike’s process is irreparably flawed, his results are mediocre, his “persona” is tiresome, and he’s so wounded by even the slightest criticism that he will move the goalposts, explain that he meant something other than he typed, or occasionally just say he was lying to trick a league mate. There’s nothing left to discuss until next year when he undervalues another freak athlete because he doesn’t know what to look for.

Nuke this whole thread from orbit.

Holyfield fans pre combine are no different to the entire community who had Harmon ranked as a first round rookie draft pick until he ran a terrible time at the combine, the only difference is people still drafted Harmon in the second round of rookie drafts instead of fading him like they should have done lol.

To get the thread back on track what are your takes on this years running back class? Genuinely curious, I recall you being highish on Akers which I’ve come around on.

[OhCruelestRanter]

That some of you scout-cosplayers thought Elijah Holyfield’s film was good is a scathing indictment of the value of watching film with regard to making fantasy decisions.

RE: Mike, my god. This is beyond beating a dead horse. You guys have taken the horse that I killed a month ago, beat it into hamburger meat, shaped it into a horse again, reanimated it, and then killed it again. Mike’s process is irreparably flawed, his results are mediocre, his “persona” is tiresome, and he’s so wounded by even the slightest criticism that he will move the goalposts, explain that he meant something other than he typed, or occasionally just say he was lying to trick a league mate. There’s nothing left to discuss until next year when he undervalues another freak athlete because he doesn’t know what to look for.

Nuke this whole thread from orbit.

Holyfield fans pre combine are no different to the entire community who had Harmon ranked as a first round rookie draft pick until he ran a terrible time at the combine, the only difference is people still drafted Harmon in the second round of rookie drafts instead of fading him like they should have done lol.

To get the thread back on track what are your takes on this years running back class? Genuinely curious, I recall you being highish on Akers which I’ve come around on.

Akers is a fine first round dynasty prospect. He dominated touches at a Power 5 school, he has good size adjusted athleticism, and he accounted for over 10% of FSU’s receiving production. His efficiency numbers were poor, but the sample size of RBs with his efficiency numbers who were still drafted in the first two rounds is too small to draw conclusions about, and includes some spectacular hits (Lev Bell, Chris Johnson) and horrible busts (Ben Tate). On top of that, raw production in college seems to correlate better to fantasy production than college efficiency. LAR seems like a bad situation, but situations change quickly in the NFL.

[Kurt G.O.A.T.]

when i watch raymond calais run all i think is "man that guy can run fast". but when you see him pulling away from dbs it's easier to make that kind of assumption.

[dynastyninja]

I liked Holyfield's tape a lot. His 40 time was a massive disappointment. I still drafted him late for a flyer, but I don't think it's that big of a crime to like his UGA film.

[OhCruelestRanter]

I liked Holyfield's tape a lot. His 40 time was a massive disappointment. I still drafted him late for a flyer, but I don't think it's that big of a crime to like his UGA film.

I don’t think liking Holyfield’s tape makes you bad at watching film. I think that the idea that people (who are allegedly skilled at watching film) liked Holyfield’s tape is an indictment of the usefulness of watching film as it pertains to making fantasy football decisions.

[YouMightDieTryin]

[MEuRaH]

I don't mind feedback or differing opinions on a fantasy perspective. However, some replies have turned abusive and either a direct attack on my character or methods. This is not encouraging for others who read such things -- specifically new users. Those who have legitimate opinions might feel prohibited from sharing due to fear of similar judgement and/or retaliation. I personally find it to be immature and a disservice to the community in general.

I've written dozens of in-depth articles for 6 years on these forums before being suggested as a writer for DLF by other members of this community. The top brass at DLF reached out to me after viewing my posts. My RB accuracy and statistical pieces on draft pick trading is what opened the door. I had to go through a series of interviews and my forum posts were further scrutinized for accuracy. Eventually getting offered the position should give credibility to the way I do my analysis.

One of my first articles was a three-piece series on last year's rookie RBs. Pre-draft I said:

-- Josh Jacobs was the best/safest for now but Miles Sanders is "the most exciting". I then said Sanders would be better in the long run and backed that up by taking him 1.01 in my rookie draft. I won that 32 team league in part because of that selection.
-- Monty was a risk and even suggested that if he lands in Chicago "there might be some problems".
-- I loved Devin Singletary as the best late value. I didn't think he would be a work horse in any system but he "would easily be a great flex play week in, week out.".
-- Darrell Henderson had too many red flags to be draftable and "will struggle to progress at the next level".
-- Everyone else was worth avoiding.
(Proof 1 / Proof 2)

My methods are under constant scrutiny by a select few, but I give paid subscribers my best possible work, and I believe the results speak for themselves. I don't know what else I could have done to be more accurate than that.

==========================================================

The only reason I felt compelled to reply is because these forums have had the greatest increase in new users in its history. I want them to not only feel welcomed, but also safe to share opinions and contribute to conversations, and to ensure they're getting quality work from the best writers DLF can find. I can't hold a candle to the in-depth analysis and research that other writers and podcasters do on a daily basis. I'm in awe every time I converse with them on the work chat. The products they produce truly are the greatest assets to dynasty league football that one can find anywhere on the internet.

I'd love it if the conversation reverted back to the topic. I realize it might be a stretch at this point and I may need to temporarily lock it until something happens and players ranks once again need to be discussed. I'd mostly love it if civility returned to our conversations, as the negativity is getting tiresome.

[Patsfan86]

People are very on edge in general now and unfortunately its coming out on these boards. Anyway back to the topic, I enjoyed your write up on the site about Swift, i enjoy the write ups in general. Last years RB rankings were what made me trust you. However the boards are always preaching talent over situation, you yourself say that, except the Swift article really came off as you were preaching situation over talent in his case. I know detroit is an awful spot but most of the article wasnt about swifts talent it was about how bad Detroit is. Like we always say, situations change, swift should take that backfield over easily in my opinion. Thats my only critique. Keep up the good work.

[MEuRaH]

However the boards are always preaching talent over situation, you yourself say that, except the Swift article really came off as you were preaching situation over talent in his case. I know detroit is an awful spot but most of the article wasnt about swifts talent it was about how bad Detroit is. Like we always say, situations change, swift should take that backfield over easily in my opinion. Thats my only critique. Keep up the good work.

You're 100% right. Swift has talent and I love the kid. For anyone reading he's referencing the article where I wrote:

If you’re looking for a running back who checks all the boxes, and you’re sitting in the fourth spot of your rookie draft, it’ll be hard to do better than Swift. If you’re looking for immediate performance and a player who you can count on to elevate your team in the future, you may need to look elsewhere.

I meant that to come off as "If you need a RB, take Swift. If you are looking for anyone to help you, I think you can trade back and draft a comparable WR and more."

You're right, I didn't word it the way I should have. I still think Swift is a top 4 guy and if I am forced to draft at 1.04 I will indeed take Swift. I was in that same scenario and was able to trade back to get Reagor+. I've very happy with that and that's the route I'd rather take.

[Shankopotamus]

So what's the concesus around here now?

CEH/JT>>>Dobbins>Akers>>>>>Swift post draft?

[OhCruelestRanter]

So what's the concesus around here now?

CEH/JT>>>Dobbins>Akers>>>>>Swift post draft?

I'm not aware of any consensus suggesting Akers is 5 greater signs better than Swift. Swift's MFL ADP, FFPC ADP, and Mizelle ADP are all earlier than Akers. I'm only through two rookie drafts so far, but Swift has been the RB3 and the RB4, while Akers has been the RB5 each time. Swift's MFL ADP is closer to Dobbins' than it is to Akers'. The only clear tier seems to be that CEH and JT are above the other 3.

[OhCruelestRanter]

I don't mind feedback or differing opinions on a fantasy perspective.

Oh good! I was worried this was going to be another rant about criticism.

However,

Uh-oh.

some replies have turned abusive and either a direct attack on my character or methods.

Your methods have been directly attacked, yes. Is that a problem? Isn't that what we're supposed to do? Criticize the way we think about this stuff so that we can improve?

As for your character, I haven't seen that. People have criticized your persona, sure. You referred to your persona here as "egotistical". I haven't seen anybody call into question whether you're a good family man or a dutiful worker. This seems like a mischaracterization. I'm sure you're a good guy! I just don't think your running back analysis is particularly useful to anybody. They're entirely different constructs. I bet Nelson Mandela would have sucked at fantasy football; that's not a criticism of his character!

This is not encouraging for others who read such things -- specifically new users. Those who have legitimate opinions might feel prohibited from sharing due to fear of similar judgement and/or retaliation. I personally find it to be immature and a disservice to the community in general.

First, that this will happen is absolute conjecture. Second, it misses the point. You haven't been criticized for your opinions so much as the way you presented and subsequently misrepresented them. Nobody is criticizing you because they're secretly Jonathan Taylor's dad; but because you claimed a near 100% hit rate. If your point here is that this is going to discourage people from claiming to be the most accurate "analyst" and then subsequently claim that they didn't miss on Kalen Ballage, they were just trying to mess with a league-mate, well, yeah. It might be a deterrent to that.

Feel free to compare my and other folks responses to your threads vs. the responses in Ghosted's WR thread. Your threads consistently devolve into this because of how you present your work and how you respond to criticism.

I've written dozens of in-depth articles for 6 years on these forums before being suggested as a writer for DLF by other members of this community. The top brass at DLF reached out to me after viewing my posts. My RB accuracy and statistical pieces on draft pick trading is what opened the door. I had to go through a series of interviews and my forum posts were further scrutinized for accuracy. Eventually getting offered the position should give credibility to the way I do my analysis.

It doesn't. Your analysis should be judged on its own merits. This "well I write for DLF so my stuff must be good" is an appeal to authority logical fallacy. In an era where the number of dynasty "analysts" is quickly approaching the number of dynasty players, this "status" only reflects that writing dynasty articles is what you choose to do with your free time. Suggesting that your thoughts should be evaluated differently than everybody else's because you worked so hard to get "dlf" at the beginning of your name on an internet forum isn't fair or correct.

One of my first articles was a three-piece series on last year's rookie RBs. Pre-draft I said:

-- Josh Jacobs was the best/safest for now but Miles Sanders is "the most exciting". I then said Sanders would be better in the long run and backed that up by taking him 1.01 in my rookie draft. I won that 32 team league in part because of that selection.
-- Monty was a risk and even suggested that if he lands in Chicago "there might be some problems".
-- I loved Devin Singletary as the best late value. I didn't think he would be a work horse in any system but he "would easily be a great flex play week in, week out.".
-- Darrell Henderson had too many red flags to be draftable and "will struggle to progress at the next level".
-- Everyone else was worth avoiding.
(Proof 1 / Proof 2)

You've also had Kerryon and Michel and Ballage ahaead of Nick Chubb, and Kenneth Dixon ahead of Derrick Henry. I'm not sure I understand the value of reposting your 2019 rankings one year out.

My methods are under constant scrutiny by a select few, but I give paid subscribers my best possible work, and I believe the results speak for themselves. I don't know what else I could have done to be more accurate than that.

I would implore you to simply let your results speak for themselves as opposed to constantly trying to explain why your misses are actually hits.

The only reason I felt compelled to reply is because these forums have had the greatest increase in new users in its history. I want them to not only feel welcomed, but also safe to share opinions and contribute to conversations, and to ensure they're getting quality work from the best writers DLF can find. I can't hold a candle to the in-depth analysis and research that other writers and podcasters do on a daily basis. I'm in awe every time I converse with them on the work chat. The products they produce truly are the greatest assets to dynasty league football that one can find anywhere on the internet.

I'd love it if the conversation reverted back to the topic. I realize it might be a stretch at this point and I may need to temporarily lock it until something happens and players ranks once again need to be discussed. I'd mostly love it if civility returned to our conversations, as the negativity is getting tiresome.

I think this is a deflection. You don't want people to criticize you... because criticizing you is going to scare off new users? C'mon, man. Apples and oranges. You earned this by telling everybody how great you were and then unravelling when some people poked a few holes in your "analysis." It has nothing to do with new users sharing their opinions. After all this time, it seems like you still think people dragged you like this because they're emotionally invested in Cam Akers or something. You've been criticized for doing stuff that nobody else does.

This whole thing feels a lot like a transparent appeal to the moderators to censor further criticism of your work- especially where you invoke "new users." I'd humbly suggest that censoring the general user base is far more detrimental to the community than structured criticism of analysis.

I'd mostly love it if civility returned to our conversations, as the negativity is getting tiresome.

I've been perfectly civil here. Civility is not the absence of dissent.