Error on Redrafter / Malcom Floyd
Posted Oct. 28 at 02:11 AM
There's an error on the revised version of the Cheat Sheet that went out Wednesday. Malcom Floyd is too high -- about 40-50 spots too high on all of the various draft boards.
Here's the deal: For many of the players, I've got it set up where there are double projections for each guy -- one for how he's performing right now, and one for how he would perform if elevated into a full-time, starting role. And I've got a mega-file set up to create an overall value from a combination of those projections.
For Chester Taylor, for example, he's got nine games left. For eight of those games, I've got him as a backup, getting about 17 percent of Minnesota's rushing production. And I also project him to start one game, where he should put up very good, starter-type numbers. His overall value is a combination of the two.
But I had a breakdown with this system with Malcom Floyd. I have interest in this player. I think if the Chargers were to put him ahead of Chris Chambers, I think Floyd might be a top-30 receiver. And I think they should put him ahead of Chambers -- and that there was a possibility that might happen. So for much of the year, I've had him as a double-listed guy, with 80 percent of his games as a productive backup and maybe 20 percent as a productive starter.
But after watching the Chargers the last two weeks, I noticed the team was rotating him liberally with Chambers -- that those guys are just sharing time. So when I was re-working their numbers, I changed the split-stat deal and just went with him putting up better numbers than Chambers (even though he's a backup).
Problem is, I changed the one set of projections for Floyd but not the other (which generally are just automatically tabulated -- for most receivers, the two projections are the same). So the computer thought I wanted the optimistic, starter-type projection for Floyd, and that I wanted it for all 10 remaining games.
That's why he's way too high. In reality, he should be about 70-75 among combined WRs and TEs on the various scoring systems.
Apologies on that one. I hope nobody wasted a waiver claim on him.
Posted by Kurt Wasiluk | Oct. 27 at 05:22 PM
Aaaaarrrggghhh! I wasted 2 leagues worth of waiver claims on the sucker!!! Also, how did Ray Rice jump so much relative to Kevin Smith from last week in a week where neither played? I traded away Rice in a package deal for Smith based on last week's TD + Yardage having them about equivalent. Now this week with no new game data, Rice is top 5 and my trade looks like garbage...
Posted by ANDY RICHARDSON | Oct. 27 at 09:14 PM
Kurt - Comparing the two cheatsheets it looks like Smith lost a few yards and also some TD percentage over the course of the week. Although neither of them played, stuff still happened. Their remaining opponents played, which might have affected their projections based on how those defenses performed. Updates on Matthew Stafford's injury -- my guess as to a factor in this specific instance -- probably made it seem that Culpepper would start more games than was previously expected, which hurts Smith. (Because Culpepper is more likely to score those short TDs himself.) Hope Stafford is able to start soon; that will probably benefit Smith's numbers.
Posted by NEAL BHARDWAJ | Oct. 28 at 08:10 AM
Andy, This is inexcusable. Before these files are disseminated, there needs to be some type of quality control in place. This is just another example how the Fantasy Index team is having a overall bad year. Neal Bhardwaj Chicago Illinois
Posted by Joe Cartan | Oct. 28 at 09:28 AM
I am a big supporter of the Index and usually have nothing but good things to say, but this is a serious error on your part. I also used a waiver claim to get this guy and dropped another receiver that was actually ranked much higher than Floyd. That said, great call on Rice and Benson, those guys are carrying me in all of my leagues.
Posted by Andrew Taylor | Oct. 28 at 09:32 AM
I wish I thought you guys were kidding. A player is 40-50 spots too high and that doesn't seem odd to you? Did you do any research to see why he might have jumped so much? If you're just blindly following advice of others, why bother to play? At the end of the season do you want to brag that, "my fantasy expert that I use is better than the one you use"? I think FFI has plenty of strengths and weaknesses, but Malcom Floyd? Seriously?
Posted by BILL REHOR | Oct. 28 at 03:02 PM
Did this message go out as an email to all subscribers as soon as you caught it? Seems like it should have, but I didn't get it. Sure am glad I happened to check the site an hour before my waiver claim was due.
Posted by Brian Barrett | Oct. 29 at 01:35 AM
I'm with Andrew on this one. I noticed Floyd seemed out of place and did a bit of research. Seemed to me that if the guy warranted a 30 spot jump then it would have been mentioned in the team summary. These guys offer a great product but you have to do some due diligence on your own. Perhaps an email alerting subscribers to the mistake should have been in order but to blame them for you dropping a better player to pick up Floyd? Nonsense.
Add a Comment
Already a registered user? Please sign in to add comments.
To add comments, you must become a registered user of our site. To register, please click here.