If the season ended today, 46% of ESPN's preseason top 10/20 positional rankings would be right. Yahoo! Sports could claim 50% accuracy, while CBS Sports comes in at 51%. And the FF4W blog? 56%.
As many of you know, each preseason I announce my top 10 positional rankings (top 20 for RB and WR), in the belief that I can do as good or better job than the "experts" helping readers draft wisely, positioning you for a strong push to the playoffs:
https://www.facebook.com/FantasyFootballForWinners/posts/731692750212040 / http://www.fantasyfootballforwinners.com/2014/09/preseason-top-1020-positional-rankings.html
Think of the thousands (millions?) of hours people spend studying ESPN, CBS Sports, or Yahoo! Sports rankings before their drafts, so that they can be "lucky" enough to draft Pierre Garcon in the 4th round or Vernon Davis in the 6th. This is why fantasy football advice is not a commodity service, to be dispensed by anyone with a computer and an opinion. It's why the "experts" so frequently fail fantasy football managers by doing lazy research and proposing worthless predictions.
Sure, there are some picks that nearly everyone will get wrong. It's why hitting 70+% is nearly impossible. The sidelining of popular elite and near-elite players like Adrian Peterson, Gio Bernard, Andre Ellington, Victor Cruz, and other "nearly can't miss" players undercut a lot of predictions. The rocky QB situation in Arizona upended the performance universal top 20 WRs Michael Floyd and Larry Fitzgerald. Recent injuries to Brandon Marshall, Torrey Smith, DeSean Jackson, and others might keep them from meeting expectations.
But at the end of the day, the best research usually prevails. Thus far, there are a few key areas where the experts and I disagreed, contributing to our differing accuracy levels:
QB -- All three sites picked Cam Newton and/or Colin Kaepernick among their top 10. I had neither, opting instead for current top 10 performers Russell Wilson and Tom Brady.
RB -- All three sites picked Toby Gerhart among their top 20, while only one picked Joique Bell and everyone overlooked Jeremy Hill. I ditched Gerhart for J. Bell and Hill.
WR -- All three sites picked Pierre Garcon, while two selected Michael Crabtree, Cordarrelle Patterson, and Pierre Garcon. I didn't include any of these four. And while I had T.Y. Hilton in the top 20 (#16), none of these experts did.
I've always been candid about picks I get right and get wrong. I've never claimed to be perfect or close to perfect. But I'll continue to hammer this issue for as long as the experts choose to ignore it: They are not very good at making fantasy predictions. Any of us could throw darts at a board and do just as well.
The difference between 46%, 50% and 56% is significant. It means if you ignored the experts and selected T.Y. Hilton over Pierre Garcon . . . or Tom Brady or Colin Kaepernick . . . or Houston's defense over Denver's . . . or Jeremy Hill or Toby Gerhart, you'd be in a much better position to win your league.
It's not hypothetical or circumstantial. It's reality. You're more likely to dominate fantasy football if you listen to the right advice vs. the wrong advice.
As many of you know, each preseason I announce my top 10 positional rankings (top 20 for RB and WR), in the belief that I can do as good or better job than the "experts" helping readers draft wisely, positioning you for a strong push to the playoffs:
https://www.facebook.com/FantasyFootballForWinners/posts/731692750212040 / http://www.fantasyfootballforwinners.com/2014/09/preseason-top-1020-positional-rankings.html
Think of the thousands (millions?) of hours people spend studying ESPN, CBS Sports, or Yahoo! Sports rankings before their drafts, so that they can be "lucky" enough to draft Pierre Garcon in the 4th round or Vernon Davis in the 6th. This is why fantasy football advice is not a commodity service, to be dispensed by anyone with a computer and an opinion. It's why the "experts" so frequently fail fantasy football managers by doing lazy research and proposing worthless predictions.
Sure, there are some picks that nearly everyone will get wrong. It's why hitting 70+% is nearly impossible. The sidelining of popular elite and near-elite players like Adrian Peterson, Gio Bernard, Andre Ellington, Victor Cruz, and other "nearly can't miss" players undercut a lot of predictions. The rocky QB situation in Arizona upended the performance universal top 20 WRs Michael Floyd and Larry Fitzgerald. Recent injuries to Brandon Marshall, Torrey Smith, DeSean Jackson, and others might keep them from meeting expectations.
But at the end of the day, the best research usually prevails. Thus far, there are a few key areas where the experts and I disagreed, contributing to our differing accuracy levels:
QB -- All three sites picked Cam Newton and/or Colin Kaepernick among their top 10. I had neither, opting instead for current top 10 performers Russell Wilson and Tom Brady.
RB -- All three sites picked Toby Gerhart among their top 20, while only one picked Joique Bell and everyone overlooked Jeremy Hill. I ditched Gerhart for J. Bell and Hill.
WR -- All three sites picked Pierre Garcon, while two selected Michael Crabtree, Cordarrelle Patterson, and Pierre Garcon. I didn't include any of these four. And while I had T.Y. Hilton in the top 20 (#16), none of these experts did.
I've always been candid about picks I get right and get wrong. I've never claimed to be perfect or close to perfect. But I'll continue to hammer this issue for as long as the experts choose to ignore it: They are not very good at making fantasy predictions. Any of us could throw darts at a board and do just as well.
The difference between 46%, 50% and 56% is significant. It means if you ignored the experts and selected T.Y. Hilton over Pierre Garcon . . . or Tom Brady or Colin Kaepernick . . . or Houston's defense over Denver's . . . or Jeremy Hill or Toby Gerhart, you'd be in a much better position to win your league.
It's not hypothetical or circumstantial. It's reality. You're more likely to dominate fantasy football if you listen to the right advice vs. the wrong advice.