This morning all subscribers are receiving their weekly dose of FF4W rankings (preseason top 300) and player values (re-draft, dynasty, and fantasy playoffs). Every Thursday since early June I’ve e-mailed these spreadsheets to anyone who wants them.
If you haven’t signed up and want to, enter your name and e-mail in the sign-up box on this page and click on the “Pay What You Want” button. Whatever it’s worth to you, you’ll immediately start receiving weekly updates. As I wrote earlier this year, money should not be an impediment to receiving value on FF4W. The “pay what you want” model ensures that all of this site’s content will remain available to anyone who wants to pay as little as a penny.
In addition to weekly rankings / player values, subscribers receive weekly insights not found on this site or my @bjrudell Twitter feed. For example, in early July I read a Tweet by ESPN’s Mike Clay:
https://twitter.com/MikeClayNFL/status/750870108818509825
It prompted me to share with the FF4W subscribers how Clay got me thinking about the notion of "the birth of a bad idea." When does speculation--or even first-hand knowledge--evolve into universally held conventional wisdom? I’m continually struck by how such thinking enters the fantasy universe’s consciousness.
Clay Tweeted that fellow ESPN'er David Newton, who covers the Panthers, told him "to expect a lower target share for Kelvin Benjamin and more of a 'committee' approach at WR." In response to Clay’s pronouncement, all across the Twittersphere people started talking about how overrated Benjamin was. Because Newton's words were taken as fact--or at the very least, as expert opinion from someone who follows this team closely--many people accepted it as a sign of things to come.
In my view, it was the birth of a bad idea, stoked (with best intentions, no doubt) by a very knowledgeable reporter who merely conveyed either what he knew or what he believed. And he had every right to share these things; he did his job. The "birth of a bad idea" isn't generally the fault of the messenger; it stems from others’ reactions. And many people that day and in ensuing weeks have offered fantasy views based on this information.
The kernel of truth behind this conventional wisdom is that Benjamin had 145 targets as a rookie in 2014, that five of his TDs came in garbage time, and that this team has a very different makeup. There's more talent. I get it. But to suggest that Benjamin peaked as a rookie is a bit nuts.
And that's how bad ideas form. Never mind the fact that three of the top nine fantasy WRs last season had fewer than 145 targets (Doug Baldwin had only 104). Never mind the fact that Benjamin arguably is Carolina's #1 offensive weapon outside of Cam Newton (yes, Devin Funchess should continue to improve, but Benjamin remains the #1 receiver). And never mind the fact that basing Benjamin's potential production on rookie year numbers is errant thinking.
Great players tend to get better well into their 20s. Assuming Benjamin is 100% healthy, he's primed for a big year, whether he gets 90 targets or 120 or 150+.
Don't listen to the echo chamber. Follow logic.
David Newton did his job with this reporting, and did it well. Mike Clay did his job passing along this reporting, and did it well. All interpretations stemming from their information fall squarely on us. And to be successful at fantasy football, we need to know when news means something and when it's largely irrelevant for our fantasy purposes.
If you haven’t signed up and want to, enter your name and e-mail in the sign-up box on this page and click on the “Pay What You Want” button. Whatever it’s worth to you, you’ll immediately start receiving weekly updates. As I wrote earlier this year, money should not be an impediment to receiving value on FF4W. The “pay what you want” model ensures that all of this site’s content will remain available to anyone who wants to pay as little as a penny.
In addition to weekly rankings / player values, subscribers receive weekly insights not found on this site or my @bjrudell Twitter feed. For example, in early July I read a Tweet by ESPN’s Mike Clay:
https://twitter.com/MikeClayNFL/status/750870108818509825
It prompted me to share with the FF4W subscribers how Clay got me thinking about the notion of "the birth of a bad idea." When does speculation--or even first-hand knowledge--evolve into universally held conventional wisdom? I’m continually struck by how such thinking enters the fantasy universe’s consciousness.
Clay Tweeted that fellow ESPN'er David Newton, who covers the Panthers, told him "to expect a lower target share for Kelvin Benjamin and more of a 'committee' approach at WR." In response to Clay’s pronouncement, all across the Twittersphere people started talking about how overrated Benjamin was. Because Newton's words were taken as fact--or at the very least, as expert opinion from someone who follows this team closely--many people accepted it as a sign of things to come.
In my view, it was the birth of a bad idea, stoked (with best intentions, no doubt) by a very knowledgeable reporter who merely conveyed either what he knew or what he believed. And he had every right to share these things; he did his job. The "birth of a bad idea" isn't generally the fault of the messenger; it stems from others’ reactions. And many people that day and in ensuing weeks have offered fantasy views based on this information.
The kernel of truth behind this conventional wisdom is that Benjamin had 145 targets as a rookie in 2014, that five of his TDs came in garbage time, and that this team has a very different makeup. There's more talent. I get it. But to suggest that Benjamin peaked as a rookie is a bit nuts.
And that's how bad ideas form. Never mind the fact that three of the top nine fantasy WRs last season had fewer than 145 targets (Doug Baldwin had only 104). Never mind the fact that Benjamin arguably is Carolina's #1 offensive weapon outside of Cam Newton (yes, Devin Funchess should continue to improve, but Benjamin remains the #1 receiver). And never mind the fact that basing Benjamin's potential production on rookie year numbers is errant thinking.
Great players tend to get better well into their 20s. Assuming Benjamin is 100% healthy, he's primed for a big year, whether he gets 90 targets or 120 or 150+.
Don't listen to the echo chamber. Follow logic.
David Newton did his job with this reporting, and did it well. Mike Clay did his job passing along this reporting, and did it well. All interpretations stemming from their information fall squarely on us. And to be successful at fantasy football, we need to know when news means something and when it's largely irrelevant for our fantasy purposes.