We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

General talk about Dynasty Leagues.
OhCruelestRanter
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2732
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:33 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby OhCruelestRanter » Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:55 am

PR0v3 wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:40 pm
OhCruelestRanter wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:27 pm You want a peer reviewed study now? Like in the Journal of Dynasty Fantasy Football?
So we’re dressing up in our statistician costume and playing make believe? Nothing backed by legitimate process? That’s cool if that’s the way it is, let’s just stop pretending like any of it actually matters.
So now this guy’s moved the goalposts to something that doesn’t exist- peer reviewed studies on dynasty fantasy football analytics. The importance of draft capital can also be ignored, as there’s never been a peer reviewed study to back it up, because the dynasty community doesn’t have a peer reviewed journal. You all might as well start throwing darts because nothing matters.

For those here in good faith, there are plenty of sources in this thread that explain this multiple times. Large data sets over multiple years, each with the same trend. The original explanations are over at Rotoviz.
COOGAN IS A CHEATER AND A THIEF

Kurt G.O.A.T.
Pro Bowler
Pro Bowler
Posts: 1026
Joined: Wed Jul 19, 2017 3:00 am

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby Kurt G.O.A.T. » Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:20 am

Jigga94 wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:18 pm
OhCruelestRanter wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:02 pm
StripesOfKC wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 1:45 pm

Actually 20 year old breakouts picked in the 2nd round seem to do pretty well.

Not sure that's what you were trying to prove though

21 is where the real drop off begins
I would be a little bit cautious about making conclusions based on specific boxes in that chart, as for a lot of them, you're narrowing the sample size. I don't think anybody thinks 22 year old breakout first round picks are going to hit 100% of the time based on a sample-size of 1. The important takeaway is that early breakouts are good and predictive, and early draft capital is good and predicitve. I'd advise you to try to grab guys who have both, then once they're gone, try to grab guys who have at least one of those features, and consider taking a player at a different position before you draft somebody with neither.
Yeah, what OCR said. I'm not sure about the sizes of 2nd/20 vs 2nd/19. I was just posting for informational purposes (maybe charts help some people more than words...).

I also edited my first post, KC. I think it's moreso coincidence. Either way they are only a few points off anyway and I would agree 21 is where I really start to drop players down boards. Not touching Aiyuk, Claypool or Jefferson for that reason
i'm scooping up jefferson wherever i can. let's see who's right.

Jigga94
GOAT
GOAT
Posts: 16060
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 8:38 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby Jigga94 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:03 am

Kurt G.O.A.T. wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 8:20 am
Jigga94 wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:18 pm
OhCruelestRanter wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 2:02 pm

I would be a little bit cautious about making conclusions based on specific boxes in that chart, as for a lot of them, you're narrowing the sample size. I don't think anybody thinks 22 year old breakout first round picks are going to hit 100% of the time based on a sample-size of 1. The important takeaway is that early breakouts are good and predictive, and early draft capital is good and predicitve. I'd advise you to try to grab guys who have both, then once they're gone, try to grab guys who have at least one of those features, and consider taking a player at a different position before you draft somebody with neither.
Yeah, what OCR said. I'm not sure about the sizes of 2nd/20 vs 2nd/19. I was just posting for informational purposes (maybe charts help some people more than words...).

I also edited my first post, KC. I think it's moreso coincidence. Either way they are only a few points off anyway and I would agree 21 is where I really start to drop players down boards. Not touching Aiyuk, Claypool or Jefferson for that reason
i'm scooping up jefferson wherever i can. let's see who's right.
I was referring to Van btw. Should have been clearer

PR0v3
Captain
Captain
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 2:58 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby PR0v3 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:12 am

OhCruelestRanter wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 6:55 am
PR0v3 wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:40 pm
OhCruelestRanter wrote: Mon Jun 29, 2020 8:27 pm You want a peer reviewed study now? Like in the Journal of Dynasty Fantasy Football?
So we’re dressing up in our statistician costume and playing make believe? Nothing backed by legitimate process? That’s cool if that’s the way it is, let’s just stop pretending like any of it actually matters.
So now this guy’s moved the goalposts to something that doesn’t exist- peer reviewed studies on dynasty fantasy football analytics. The importance of draft capital can also be ignored, as there’s never been a peer reviewed study to back it up, because the dynasty community doesn’t have a peer reviewed journal. You all might as well start throwing darts because nothing matters.

For those here in good faith, there are plenty of sources in this thread that explain this multiple times. Large data sets over multiple years, each with the same trend. The original explanations are over at Rotoviz.
Move the goalposts about what? All I’ve asked is to see the study that came to the determination that breakout age means anything, since there were two pages worth of discussion about how Pittman’s breakout age was such a problem. I’ve read the links posted, and it is clear that there is no evidence that breakout age is predictive of anything in and of itself. Thanks for your help though, you really showed me!
12 Team .5 PPR - 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 WR/RB 20 man rosters, 5 man taxi est. 2018
QB: Dak, Pickett
RB: CMC, Taylor, Gibson, Dillon, Akers, Penny
WR: JJeff, Hollywood, Olave, Toney, Aiyuk, Jeudy, C. Davis, Boyd, C. Samuel,
TE: Njoku, Gesicki
2023 picks: 1.x, 2.x, 3.x, 4.x

OhCruelestRanter
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2732
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:33 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby OhCruelestRanter » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:25 am

You’ve moved from “the coin flipped heads 8 times” to needlessly and derisively calling everything short of a peer reviewed study “dressing up in statistician costume and playing make believe.”

Again, we can explain it to you, but we can’t understand it for you. Best of luck to you.
COOGAN IS A CHEATER AND A THIEF

PR0v3
Captain
Captain
Posts: 781
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2018 2:58 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby PR0v3 » Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:40 am

OhCruelestRanter wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 9:25 am You’ve moved from “the coin flipped heads 8 times” to needlessly and derisively calling everything short of a peer reviewed study “dressing up in statistician costume and playing make believe.”

Again, we can explain it to you, but we can’t understand it for you. Best of luck to you.
I never asked for you to explain anything, just wanted to see the original source work. Thanks though, good luck!
12 Team .5 PPR - 1 QB, 2 RB, 2 WR, 1 TE, 1 WR/RB 20 man rosters, 5 man taxi est. 2018
QB: Dak, Pickett
RB: CMC, Taylor, Gibson, Dillon, Akers, Penny
WR: JJeff, Hollywood, Olave, Toney, Aiyuk, Jeudy, C. Davis, Boyd, C. Samuel,
TE: Njoku, Gesicki
2023 picks: 1.x, 2.x, 3.x, 4.x

YouMightDieTryin
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2561
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:09 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby YouMightDieTryin » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:25 am

Are we still talking about Michael Pittman?
10-Team Dynasty League QB/RB/RB/WR/WR/WR/FLEX (23 man rosters + 2 IR + 2 Taxi, non-PPR scoring)
QB: Herbert, Goff
RB: Bijan, JT, Saquon, J.Cook, K.Hunt, Foreman, Z.White, McKinnon, S.Tucker
WR: G.Wilson, Olave, Jeudy, Pittman, J.Williams, OBJ, N. Brown, JuJu,
TE: Chig, Conklin, L. Thomas
Taxi: M.Mims, Ro. Johnson
'24: (4) 1sts, 2nd, (2) 3rds, 4th
'25: (2) 1sts, 2nd, 3rd, 4th

User avatar
Blueboy
All Pro
All Pro
Posts: 1887
Joined: Mon Jan 01, 2018 4:27 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby Blueboy » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:31 am

YouMightDieTryin wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:25 am Are we still talking about Michael Pittman?
Who?

12-team SF, PPR, TE premium, 0.25 PPCarry
1QB 2RB 2WR 1TE 1SF 4Flex
QB: Mahomes, Fields, Love
RB: Bijan, ETN, Pollard, Achane, Herbert
WR: Kupp, Hill, Metcalf, Ridley, Jeudy, D.J. M, Burks, Hollywood, Wan'Dale
TE: Kyle Pitts, Goedert

YouMightDieTryin
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2561
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:09 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby YouMightDieTryin » Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:47 am

Blueboy wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:31 am
YouMightDieTryin wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:25 am Are we still talking about Michael Pittman?
Who?
Michael Pittman, Jr. is a 6'4" WR from USC who is the son of Michael Pittman, Sr. Pittman Sr most notably played RB for the Buccaneers, but his son is making a name for himself as WR. Now he did stay for his senior year which might be a small knock on him, but he also refined his game his final year and was able to be the 8th WR drafted. That might not be saying much, but it is an arguably deep class and was still drafted at #34 overall. Some say he should've came out the year before, but would he have had the same trajectory ESB, his former USC teammate, has run by doing so? Time will tell, but by raising his draft stock from a 3rd round grade to a high 2nd I'd say he's going in the right direction.

OhCruelestRanter
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2732
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:33 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby OhCruelestRanter » Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:22 am

YouMightDieTryin wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:47 am
Blueboy wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:31 am
YouMightDieTryin wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 10:25 am Are we still talking about Michael Pittman?
Who?
Michael Pittman, Jr. is a 6'4" WR from USC who is the son of Michael Pittman, Sr. Pittman Sr most notably played RB for the Buccaneers, but his son is making a name for himself as WR. Now he did stay for his senior year which might be a small knock on him, but he also refined his game his final year and was able to be the 8th WR drafted. That might not be saying much, but it is an arguably deep class and was still drafted at #34 overall. Some say he should've came out the year before, but would he have had the same trajectory ESB, his former USC teammate, has run by doing so? Time will tell, but by raising his draft stock from a 3rd round grade to a high 2nd I'd say he's going in the right direction.
ESB is the brother of his USC teammate, Amon Ra St. Brown. ESB played at Notre Dame.
COOGAN IS A CHEATER AND A THIEF

User avatar
Dynasty DeLorean
Degenerate
Degenerate
Posts: 8856
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2015 8:45 am

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby Dynasty DeLorean » Tue Jun 30, 2020 1:14 pm

@Prov, I haven’t found a single WR that profiles like Pittman (big, athletic, productive in college, and great draft capital. Have my own definitions and cutoffs for reach) that has busted solely from having a “bad” breakout age. You can find wrs that check all boxes except for production that have busted. Or check all except athleticism that have busted. Or checked all except draft capital that have busted. But I haven’t found a single player that checks all but breakout age that has busted. I think it’s clear that from a macro point of view, on the whole a good breakout age is better. But when you start looking at it from a micro point of view, as in examining maybe a single player or certain subset of players, you can get very different results of its efficacy. Hopefully that answers your question.

Sriracha
Ring of Fame
Ring of Fame
Posts: 3698
Joined: Tue Jun 11, 2019 2:38 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby Sriracha » Tue Jun 30, 2020 1:27 pm

Dynasty DeLorean wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 1:14 pm @Prov, I haven’t found a single WR that profiles like Pittman (big, athletic, productive in college, and great draft capital. Have my own definitions and cutoffs for reach) that has busted solely from having a “bad” breakout age. You can find wrs that check all boxes except for production that have busted. Or check all except athleticism that have busted. Or checked all except draft capital that have busted. But I haven’t found a single player that checks all but breakout age that has busted. I think it’s clear that from a macro point of view, on the whole a good breakout age is better. But when you start looking at it from a micro point of view, as in examining maybe a single player or certain subset of players, you can get very different results of its efficacy. Hopefully that answers your question.
Are his dissenters saying that Pittman will bust?

I don't think he will. You can take his current skillset and he'd have success in the NFL, right now -- which isn't something you can say about a lot of rookie WRs. I'd be a lot more bullish on him if this class didn't have a bevvy of WRs that have rock solid profiles -- Cee Dee Lamb, Jerry Jeudy, Jalen Reagor, Justin Jefferson, Tee Higgins should all be going ahead of him given their profiles. That's not a knock on Pittman, it's an acknowledgment of how good those WR prospects are.

YouMightDieTryin
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2561
Joined: Fri Apr 05, 2019 1:09 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby YouMightDieTryin » Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:12 pm

OhCruelestRanter wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 11:22 am
ESB is the brother of his USC teammate, Amon Ra St. Brown. ESB played at Notre Dame.
Fudge! I knew i messed that up after I hit enter. I tried so hard.

OhCruelestRanter
MVP
MVP
Posts: 2732
Joined: Sun Jul 06, 2014 5:33 pm

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby OhCruelestRanter » Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:12 pm

Dynasty DeLorean wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 1:14 pm @Prov, I haven’t found a single WR that profiles like Pittman (big, athletic, productive in college, and great draft capital. Have my own definitions and cutoffs for reach) that has busted solely from having a “bad” breakout age. You can find wrs that check all boxes except for production that have busted. Or check all except athleticism that have busted. Or checked all except draft capital that have busted. But I haven’t found a single player that checks all but breakout age that has busted. I think it’s clear that from a macro point of view, on the whole a good breakout age is better. But when you start looking at it from a micro point of view, as in examining maybe a single player or certain subset of players, you can get very different results of its efficacy. Hopefully that answers your question.
First, the phrase that nobody "busted solely from having a 'bad' breakout age" demonstrates a misunderstanding of the concept in general. It's like saying "nobody's ever died from obesity". People don't die from obesity (they die from illnesses strongly associated with obesity) and people don't bust "because" of a late breakout but rather they bust because of some deficiency that presented itself when they weren't productive until they were older college players.

Second, breakout age is a production metric so saying that somebody checks a production box but not the breakout age box is inherently flawed. It's like saying that somebody checks the size box but not the weight box, or checks the athleticism box but not the forty/jump box.

Third, and this is immediately off the top of my head, but Breshad Perriman was big, athletic, productive, and drafted in the first round, but had a 20 year old breakout age and busted. Kevin White was also big, athletic, productive, and drafted in the first round, but didn't break out until age 21, and he busted.

But I'm going to go out on the sturdiest limb of all time and suggest that maybe you've just narrowed your parameters the the point where the sample size is tiny and you can't draw a relevant conclusion from it anyway.

For everybody who's actually curious, here's why narrowing the sample size doesn't make sense. When you try to cut your sample size by, say, players who are 6'2" or taller, what you're saying is that you suspect there's a reason that 6'2" WRs will break out later. The problem is that there's no probably causality there, so all you're doing is making your sample-size smaller. The more you cut your sample size, the less meaningful your data becomes. So when you cut your data to WRs taller than 6'2" and drafted in the 2nd round or earlier who had 1000 yards in their last season of college and whose dads had 10 year NFL careers, sure, you can get the data to say whatever you want, but it's not meaningful.

For the 19thish GD time, just in case somebody other than Dunning and Kruger decide to read this thread, I'd recommend simply considering Pittman's relatively late breakout age as a piece of a large profile. Late breakout, declared as a senior, good market share numbers, early draft capital, good athleticism. If you really like Pittman, and you want to make an argument for him, it's really easy to say that you suspect his late breakout came from inexperience at the position and legitimate competition from multiple NFL WRs throughout his career- JuJu, and St. Brown in particular, and that you thought he was productive enough as a senior while surrounded by NFL talent, and you think he'll be propped up by a good situation, etc. There's no reason to try to run headlong into a losing argument where you try to invalidate a thoroughly well demonstrated concept like breakout age because you like this one player who broke out at 20.9.
COOGAN IS A CHEATER AND A THIEF

User avatar
Dynasty DeLorean
Degenerate
Degenerate
Posts: 8856
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2015 8:45 am

Re: We're all sleeping on Michael Pittman

Postby Dynasty DeLorean » Tue Jun 30, 2020 2:18 pm

IZigUZag wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 1:27 pm
Dynasty DeLorean wrote: Tue Jun 30, 2020 1:14 pm @Prov, I haven’t found a single WR that profiles like Pittman (big, athletic, productive in college, and great draft capital. Have my own definitions and cutoffs for reach) that has busted solely from having a “bad” breakout age. You can find wrs that check all boxes except for production that have busted. Or check all except athleticism that have busted. Or checked all except draft capital that have busted. But I haven’t found a single player that checks all but breakout age that has busted. I think it’s clear that from a macro point of view, on the whole a good breakout age is better. But when you start looking at it from a micro point of view, as in examining maybe a single player or certain subset of players, you can get very different results of its efficacy. Hopefully that answers your question.
Are his dissenters saying that Pittman will bust?

I don't think he will. You can take his current skillset and he'd have success in the NFL, right now -- which isn't something you can say about a lot of rookie WRs. I'd be a lot more bullish on him if this class didn't have a bevvy of WRs that have rock solid profiles -- Cee Dee Lamb, Jerry Jeudy, Jalen Reagor, Justin Jefferson, Tee Higgins should all be going ahead of him given their profiles. That's not a knock on Pittman, it's an acknowledgment of how good those WR prospects are.
Well said, only thing I’d argue is Higgins tested pretty poorly in the athleticism department. I’d argue his profile on paper isn’t better than Pittmans. Being a bad athlete when you’re big is not good.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 36 guests