Official/Final 2020 Rookie RB Ranks

[FantasyFreak]

So you only pay attention to those who have better accuracy than the NFL? I'd bet there are very few (none) on here who do. I doubt many people stick to their rankings post NFL draft.

Saying this type of ranking system is flawed is fine, but saying it isn't valuable is an oversight. I look at this type of analysis to find insight on the guys who aren't in the top tier. Guys like singletary, who wasn't on my radar at all, and I was able to dig deeper on because he showed up here. That late 2nd, early 3rd pick for me turned into an asset worth a 1st quickly. That's what I'm looking for. If you are looking for someone with better accuracy than the NFL, it's not going to happen.

But Singletary would have been on your radar after he was drafted in the third by the Bills, not because of Mike's report. I don't understand your point. If his system is only to be judged on the segment after the NFL draft, there are plenty of other more credible sources to look at. Why do the first 2 at all, when you have UDFA's as your top tier in the first stage? To me it just shows that you need more data/info from more credible sources to make you analysis anywhere near accurate, which anyone can do.

Sounds good. We can probably go ahead and delete 95% of this discussion forum as it is all just pre-draft fluff anyway. I think maybe the bigger concern is the way Mike goes about it? Which I agree with, can be over the top and deserve criticism.

Well that was is originally it, but I was over that a while ago. The other poster claimed it's only the 3rd stage that he's to be judged on, so now I am confused as to the desired outcome, as even that stage doesn't have actual rankings, just tiers, apart from stating CEH is the 1.01. I do see a brief breakdown, but ranks and tiers are something different to me. A rank is a defined number in an order vs his peers, which this is not.

[CGW]

I agree there, the tiers don't really add definitive ranking so it is hard to judge them year to year on "hit rate". But that's ok, because I ultimately don't use any one source to make my rookie lists. I look over many sources of info and formulate my own ranks. That's why I could care less if Mike claims to be a guru or whatever. He did turn me onto Singletary over Harris, Hill, Mattison and Henderson who were all going before him in most drafts according to Mizelle at the time of my drafts last summer. I'll take that for whatever it's worth.

[FantasyFreak]

I agree there, the tiers don't really add definitive ranking so it is hard to judge them year to year on "hit rate". But that's ok, because I ultimately don't use any one source to make my rookie lists. I look over many sources of info and formulate my own ranks. That's why I could care less if Mike claims to be a guru or whatever. He did turn me onto Singletary over Harris, Hill, Mattison and Henderson who were all going before him in most drafts according to Mizelle at the time of my drafts last summer. I'll take that for whatever it's worth.

I guess my issue is the use of language for the threads. It should not be listed as ranks, but rather tiers. Which is fine, I was just confused about that, but I have been up all night, so there is that, too.

[Jigga94]

So you only pay attention to those who have better accuracy than the NFL? I'd bet there are very few (none) on here who do. I doubt many people stick to their rankings post NFL draft.

Saying this type of ranking system is flawed is fine, but saying it isn't valuable is an oversight. I look at this type of analysis to find insight on the guys who aren't in the top tier. Guys like singletary, who wasn't on my radar at all, and I was able to dig deeper on because he showed up here. That late 2nd, early 3rd pick for me turned into an asset worth a 1st quickly. That's what I'm looking for. If you are looking for someone with better accuracy than the NFL, it's not going to happen.

But Singletary would have been on your radar after he was drafted in the third by the Bills, not because of Mike's report. I don't understand your point. If his system is only to be judged on the segment after the NFL draft, there are plenty of other more credible sources to look at. Why do the first 2 at all, when you have UDFA's as your top tier in the first stage? To me it just shows that you need more data/info from more credible sources to make you analysis anywhere near accurate, which anyone can do.

Sounds good. We can probably go ahead and delete 95% of this discussion forum as it is all just pre-draft fluff anyway. I think maybe the bigger concern is the way Mike goes about it? Which I agree with, can be over the top and deserve criticism.

I think this a lot but then realize I come here 25 times a day

[MEuRaH]

The reality for me is, in this type of 3 tiered system, anybody can look good, and adjust. In Mike's 1st tier last year, Holyfield was a top back. But the 3rd tiers later, you can adjust. I guess I just don't really see what this offers anybody, really.

It's a forum. I posted it for something to read/do. Someone asked about my process when evaluating RBs and I thought I could make something cool out of it. As a result, my Holyfield rank kept popping up, even though he didn't make my final ranks. Here we are 2+ year removed and he's back! I had him ranked highly pre-combine, then post-combine when his 40 time could nearly be clocked with a sundial, I took him off my ranks entirely. That's pretty standard. IMO I don't think I should be criticized for it. If anything, Holyfield deserves the criticism, yes?

I've posted a lot less recently. I love the critique in rankings or feedback on players. I love discussing my ranks or your ranks, variables we hadn't considered as a community, etc. I'm not into this other stuff.

[joeya2001]

But Singletary would have been on your radar after he was drafted in the third by the Bills, not because of Mike's report. I don't understand your point. If his system is only to be judged on the segment after the NFL draft, there are plenty of other more credible sources to look at. Why do the first 2 at all, when you have UDFA's as your top tier in the first stage? To me it just shows that you need more data/info from more credible sources to make you analysis anywhere near accurate, which anyone can do.

Sounds good. We can probably go ahead and delete 95% of this discussion forum as it is all just pre-draft fluff anyway. I think maybe the bigger concern is the way Mike goes about it? Which I agree with, can be over the top and deserve criticism.

I think this a lot but then realize I come here 25 times a day

I thought I was the only one

[joeya2001]

The reality for me is, in this type of 3 tiered system, anybody can look good, and adjust. In Mike's 1st tier last year, Holyfield was a top back. But the 3rd tiers later, you can adjust. I guess I just don't really see what this offers anybody, really.

It's a forum. I posted it for something to read/do. Someone asked about my process when evaluating RBs and I thought I could make something cool out of it. As a result, my Holyfield rank kept popping up, even though he didn't make my final ranks. Here we are 2+ year removed and he's back! I had him ranked highly pre-combine, then post-combine when his 40 time could nearly be clocked with a sundial, I took him off my ranks entirely. That's pretty standard. IMO I don't think I should be criticized for it. If anything, Holyfield deserves the criticism, yes?

I've posted a lot less recently. I love the critique in rankings or feedback on players. I love discussing my ranks or your ranks, variables we hadn't considered as a community, etc. I'm not into this other stuff.

Keep it up mike, I've followed you for a while now on here and love it

[Ray Finkle]

Did @dlf_mikeh sleep with a bunch of the forum members wives or what?

[joeya2001]

Did @dlf_mikeh sleep with a bunch of the forum members wives or what?

I still would find his RB writeups more impressive!

[AussieMate]

But Singletary would have been on your radar after he was drafted in the third by the Bills, not because of Mike's report. I don't understand your point. If his system is only to be judged on the segment after the NFL draft, there are plenty of other more credible sources to look at. Why do the first 2 at all, when you have UDFA's as your top tier in the first stage? To me it just shows that you need more data/info from more credible sources to make you analysis anywhere near accurate, which anyone can do.

Sounds good. We can probably go ahead and delete 95% of this discussion forum as it is all just pre-draft fluff anyway. I think maybe the bigger concern is the way Mike goes about it? Which I agree with, can be over the top and deserve criticism.

Well that was is originally it, but I was over that a while ago. The other poster claimed it's only the 3rd stage that he's to be judged on, so now I am confused as to the desired outcome, as even that stage doesn't have actual rankings, just tiers, apart from stating CEH is the 1.01. I do see a brief breakdown, but ranks and tiers are something different to me. A rank is a defined number in an order vs his peers, which this is not.

The issue might be that you are looking for Mike's desired outcome from him posting his first 2 stages lol, you'll have to ask Mike about that and also will have to be disappointed if he does it "just because he can" haha, this is a forum for a fantasy game, looking for meaning behind what people post on the internet is a good way to send you loopy.

[cantguardjake]

The reality for me is, in this type of 3 tiered system, anybody can look good, and adjust. In Mike's 1st tier last year, Holyfield was a top back. But the 3rd tiers later, you can adjust. I guess I just don't really see what this offers anybody, really.

It's a forum. I posted it for something to read/do. Someone asked about my process when evaluating RBs and I thought I could make something cool out of it. As a result, my Holyfield rank kept popping up, even though he didn't make my final ranks. Here we are 2+ year removed and he's back! I had him ranked highly pre-combine, then post-combine when his 40 time could nearly be clocked with a sundial, I took him off my ranks entirely. That's pretty standard. IMO I don't think I should be criticized for it. If anything, Holyfield deserves the criticism, yes?

I've posted a lot less recently. I love the critique in rankings or feedback on players. I love discussing my ranks or your ranks, variables we hadn't considered as a community, etc. I'm not into this other stuff.

This is what’s important. Too many gatekeepers getting around at the moment, driving discussion away from the actual players.

Probably why DD hasn’t posted his report yet either.

[Cult of Dionysus]

DDs still "fine tuning" his formula so he can include CEH.

[Orenthal Shames]

DDs still "fine tuning" his formula so he can include CEH.

[Johnny B. Goode]

It’s a wonder why anyone takes any stance anymore in these online forums. You say one thing that might be against the grain, plant your flag, or deviate from the group think and you’ve got a select number of people jumping down your throat, or stalking you incessantly to try and insult you. It happens in every forum, and I think it’s largely a pissing contest/jealousy/I’m going to prove that I think I’m smarter than you situation.

Driving people away from posting their ideas and sparking discussion/a different thought is what will be the death of online forums. Challenging discussion is great- it often reaffirms my beliefs, but also makes me think twice about my stance on things.

People should be better, or find some sense of perspective/happiness in life

[Bronco Billy]

Did @dlf_mikeh sleep with a bunch of the forum members wives or what?

Almost 100% of them.