2007 Cheatsheet Compiler/Draft Buddy

[Mike FF Today 607]

Hey Guys,

 

OK we're off and running with year #7 of the Compiler/Draft Buddy!

 

FF Today Cheatsheet Compiler & Draft Buddy

 

These Excel-based programs make draft day a snap! The Compiler creates customised cheatsheets for your league while Draft Buddy tracks your draft to help you make the best draft-day decisions.

 

Some of the new additions in '07 include...

• Compiler: Player Comparison tab - View Screencast
  
• Compiler: Alternate cheatsheets with player notes
  
• Buddy: Draft a player from any cheatsheet
  
• Buddy: Auction inflation calculations
  
• Buddy: Trash talking sound effects
  

...and there's more where that came from.

 

Price is $16.95. Your purchase will entitle you to product updates through the start of the regular season (9/6). Our first minimal price increase since we began selling the CC/DB four years ago.

 

Support: Mike MacGregor and Mike Krueger will be offering tech support here at this board or you can send an email to compiler@fftoday.com if you have any questions. We will be happy to help!

 

Purchase Info: You may make your purchase with your credit card through Paypal, or by check/money order. Order here

 

Login Help: If you have any trouble logging in after your purchase to download the Compiler/Draft Buddy, please send a note to login@fftoday.com and we will assist you ASAP.

 

Here's our tentative schedule for projection updates. Unscheduled updates may occur but will post them if here if that happens...

 

6/4 - Initial release

6/21 - Done

7/5 - Done

7/26 - Done

8/2 - Done

8/9 - Done

8/16 - Done

8/23 - Done

8/30 - Done

8/31 - Done (unscheduled - for JAX QBs & DEN RBs )

9/4 - Done

 

Remember, you don't need to download a new copy of the CC/DB just for the projection updates. Simply

 

1. Open the Compiler

2. Go to "setup" tab

3. Click the "Update Projections" button

 

Viola! All the numbers, depth charts, adp data, etc. will be updated.

 

FF Today Cheatsheet Compiler & Draft Buddy

 

OK, let us know if you have any questions as we get this fantasy season rollin!

 

 

MK

[dbergan 0]

Cool. 3rd year customer.

 

 

Say, I'm wondering if you have given any thought to adding crank scores to the compiler. That's the one metric lacking in the program that I've found to be very valuable. Or does Matt have some kind of patent on his formula?

 

So each year, I end up running dual spreadsheets during the draft (yours and a crank one), where, obviously, you guys could cut the work in half.

 

Kind regards,

David Bergan

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Cool. 3rd year customer.

Say, I'm wondering if you have given any thought to adding crank scores to the compiler. That's the one metric lacking in the program that I've found to be very valuable. Or does Matt have some kind of patent on his formula?

 

So each year, I end up running dual spreadsheets during the draft (yours and a crank one), where, obviously, you guys could cut the work in half.

 

Kind regards,

David Bergan

 

Can't talk now... playing Alpha Blast. My top word was "sylvas" No, that wasn't entirely intentional

[dbergan 0]

Can't talk now... playing Alpha Blast. My top word was "sylvas" No, that wasn't entirely intentional

 

 

No way. My signature finally worked.

 

 

Don't get too hooked on it, because you still have to add crank scores to the compiler.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

The answers to your questions:

 

Say, I'm wondering if you have given any thought to adding crank scores to the compiler.

 

and

 

Or does Matt have some kind of patent on his formula?

 

are Yes and Yes. We've talked about it a little.

 

Really the biggest hurdle is from a technical aspect. The Crank Scores require a tremendous amount of data to calculate, so the Compiler in its current state could not even tackle holding all the data and calculating custom Crank Scores. It may in fact, blow up if we tried

[jgcrawfish 232]

I still like the crank score addition idea, would be a killer feature to have. Also, when does ADP Data start to update (it's petty, but it bothers me seeing Tiki Barber in my ADP list)?

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Tiki? I think you're still on last year's data. Try updating now.

 

I will update the ADP and hopefully player notes soon.

[jgcrawfish 232]

Tiki? I think you're still on last year's data. Try updating now.

 

I will update the ADP and hopefully player notes soon.

 

1 RB Larry Johnson KC 1.01 1.01 1.04

2 RB LaDainian Tomlinson SD 1.02 1.01 1.03

3 RB Shaun Alexander SEA 1.02 1.01 1.06

4 RB Tiki Barber NYG 1.04 1.04 1.07

5 RB Steven Jackson STL 1.05 1.04 1.09

6 RB Ronnie Brown MIA 1.07 1.03 2.02

7 RB Edgerrin James ARI 1.08 1.04 2.06

8 RB LaMont Jordan OAK 1.09 1.05 2.08

9 RB Rudi Johnson CIN 1.09 1.05 2.10

10 QB Peyton Manning IND 1.10 1.01 2.09

11 RB Cadillac Williams TB 2.01 1.05 2.08

12 WR Steve Smith CAR 2.02 1.06 2.07

13 RB Clinton Portis WAS 2.03 1.05 4.02

14 WR Chad Johnson CIN 2.03 1.08 3.01

15 WR Torry Holt STL 2.05 1.09 4.02

16 WR Larry Fitzgerald ARI 2.06 1.05 3.06

 

PROJECTION UPDATE STATUS

Last Update: Jun 11 2007 3:04 PM

ADP data done

QB projections and depth done + notes

RB projections and depth done + notes

WR projections and depth done + notes

TE projections and depth done + notes

K projections and depth done + notes

DEF projections and depth done + notes

DL projections and depth skipped

LB projections and depth skipped

DB projections and depth skipped

 

Change last update date done

Compile Cheatsheets done

 

That's right off the ADP page of the football_compiler_2007_1.0.xls file 10 teamer (there on both 12 and 14 as well). 2nd part is the update status.

[dbergan 0]

The Crank Scores require a tremendous amount of data to calculate, so the Compiler in its current state could not even tackle holding all the data and calculating custom Crank Scores. It may in fact, blow up if we tried

 

 

Hmmm... right, to compile crank scores you need player data from each week, whereas the spreadsheet only has yearly totals right now.

 

Well, let's think it through. The data and algorithms already exist on this website, so you could set up a new php page to take advantage of that and put crank data into tables that would be easy for the compiler to read via a web query. This php page would take query strings for position, teams in league, QB starters, etc. (much like the linked one above already does), and since the compiler already uses web queries to pull projection data from this website, it shouldn't be hard to add another web query to pull crank values (not the week-by-week data, but just the end values). The web query command is built on the fly adding query string values that correspond to league settings and scoring already on the compiler spreadsheet.

 

I think you can do it Mike. (Or is there something I'm missing?)

[dbergan 0]

I still like the crank score addition idea, would be a killer feature to have. Also, when does ADP Data start to update (it's petty, but it bothers me seeing Tiki Barber in my ADP list)?

 

 

No Tiki on my list.

[jgcrawfish 232]

No Tiki on my list.

 

He doesn't show up in the rankings, only shows up on the ADP tab. I just killed my original CC and reopened from the zip file...

 

PROJECTION UPDATE STATUS

Last Update: Jun 11 2007 4:27 PM

ADP data done

 

10 TEAM ADP DATA Highlight: RB WR TE

Rank Pos Player Team ADP High Low

1 RB Larry Johnson KC 1.01 1.01 1.04

2 RB LaDainian Tomlinson SD 1.02 1.01 1.03

3 RB Shaun Alexander SEA 1.02 1.01 1.06

4 RB Tiki Barber NYG 1.04 1.04 1.07

5 RB Steven Jackson STL 1.05 1.04 1.09

 

12 TEAM ADP DATA

Rank Pos Player Team ADP High Low

1 RB Larry Johnson KC 1.01 1.01 1.03

2 RB LaDainian Tomlinson SD 1.02 1.01 1.04

3 RB Shaun Alexander SEA 1.02 1.01 1.04

4 RB Tiki Barber NYG 1.04 1.04 1.07

5 RB Steven Jackson STL 1.06 1.04 1.11

 

14 TEAM ADP DATA

Rank Pos Player Team ADP High Low

1 RB LaDainian Tomlinson SD 1.01 1.01 1.04

2 RB Shaun Alexander SEA 1.02 1.01 1.05

3 RB Larry Johnson KC 1.02 1.01 1.06

4 RB Tiki Barber NYG 1.04 1.02 1.07

5 RB Steven Jackson STL 1.06 1.04 1.12

 

per the webquery it says it's pulling from the following location:

 

ADP data

 

Which lists it exactly as posted...

[T-Bird1 0]

Weird - No Tiki on my ADP page

 

....and while I'm here, are you not projecting any output for M Bush, Oakland ??

[jgcrawfish 232]

Ok, now you goobers have me worried...

 

Alright, I'm good now. I think it was a weird quirk in the pre-release version I had....

 

ADP Data looks right now...

[Mike MacGregor 20]

I think you can do it Mike.

 

LOL. Appreciate the vote of confidence, but it would no doubt be very complex. Off the top of my head, here is a small list of hurdles to overcome:

 

1. Crank page fantasy scoring is coming from MyFFToday, or default settings. We would want the scoring for any Crank data going into the Compiler to match the scoring in the Compiler. There is currently no connection between the Compiler and MyFFToday.

 

2. Matching up the players will be tough. The web queries that currently exist in the Compiler are very strictly defined so I know for sure all the data (projection updates) feeding into the Compiler match up on the right rows. The Crank page does not include all players. There would need to be a new special Crank update page created, I think.

 

3. It could end up being A LOT of web queries. Say you want Crank data from 2 different time spans, per position. That is 14. Although I suppose you'd only need to update it once (once you got the specific parameters you want, and per scoring system), this could/would be a strain on the server.

 

4. That patent thing. Its hard to say if people would be willing to pay more or if more people would buy the Compiler if it included Crank Scores. Thoughts?

[dbergan 0]

I guess dual spreadsheets aren't that inconvenient. Draft only comes once a year anyway.

[mtnwesdew 0]

I've got an observation... I was setting up my Draft Buddy with our league's draft order (18 team league). On the "Draft Input" tab, I show all 18 teams that I entered. However, on the "By Team" tab, it only displays teams 1-12.

 

I don't remember this ever having been a problem with previous versions, so either I'm doing something wrong, or maybe this is just a weird quirk.

 

Anyone else notice this?

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Did you run the Buddy Setup? It would seem so if you see all 18 teams on the draft input tab, but the setup should also show all 18 teams you need for your league on the by team tab.

[mtnwesdew 0]

Did you run the Buddy Setup? It would seem so if you see all 18 teams on the draft input tab, but the setup should also show all 18 teams you need for your league on the by team tab.

 

Hey Mike,

 

Thanks for responding. Yeah, I did run the Buddy Setup. I tried it again just to make sure I'm not going crazy, but sure enough, the "By Team" tab still only shows teams 1-12 while "Draft Input" tab does give me all 18.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Very strange mtnwesdew as I haven't heard any other reports of this. It may just be a matter of unhiding the columns on the by team tab to the right of the 12th team you see there.

 

Do you have the "Clear Keerpers and Draft Picks" option on the setup tab in Buddy checked, or unchecked?

 

You can send me your copy of the Compiler and Buddy to take a look at. I'm at compiler@fftoday.com.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Projections updated today, so everyone can run the update if they like.

 

I also uploaded a version 1.1 to the member's area. Now, if you just purchased in the last week you should be using the exact same version as the 1.1 I just uploaded. I made these changes earlier, but wanted to wait until our next update (today) to change the filename, in case there was anything else that needed changing.

 

If you bought early, then you might want to download the 1.1. The changes may not even be noticeable though. Here they are, from the member download page version notes:

 

1. Compiler: Fixed projected receptions calc for WR and TE when allocating some recepts from Site B and Site C.

 

2. Buddy: Fixed some minor issues including incorrect Max Bid function for auction drafts, and projected roster/starter fantasy points when players drafted that have zero projected fantasy points.

 

3. Pal: Fixed issues pulling custom and notes data from the raw tab to the clean tab for various positions.

[dbergan 0]

Curious customer:

 

On the "Setup" page of the compiler, please explain the "Overall Rankings/Custom Baselines" section.

 

And what's the theory behind the different preset choices? ("Stud RB", "QB by committee", "Last starter drafted", etc.)

 

Apparently this is where you can give positions different values relative to each other... but why would anyone want to do that? In my opinion, if I'm reading it right, "Last starter drafted" is the only selection that makes any sense... the value of a running back should be judged with respect to the last starting RB that will be drafted. Then a positive value means "this RB is predicted to score X FF points this season more than the last RB that will (theoretically) be taken," which is a sensible way to approach the draft.

 

"Median Player Drafted" comes in 2nd, because it's basically the same idea, but includes benched players into the value system (which, in my opinion, isn't as smart as excluding them).

 

 

The rest of them just make no sense to me.

 

For example, "Compiler Draft Pick Recommended" (the default) assigns arbitrary weights to the positions... In my league that starts 2 QBs, and 2 DEFs, it gives the following:

 

QB 14.4

DEF 7.2

 

But why are the FF points earned by a Defense only half as valuable as the FF points earned by a QB? What's the reasoning behind this? What are you adjusting for? If Baltimore is predicted to outscore the 24th ranked defense by 138 points (with our league's scoring system, it is) I should be giving ample consideration to taking Baltimore in the first round or two.

 

According to "Last Starter Drafted" it's #2 overall... with "Compiler Draft Pick Recommended" it falls to 6th place.

 

So, in essence, why is it "recommended" to downgrade the predicted value of defenses, and upgrade RBs, QBs, etc? Or is my understanding of this feature just completely out of whack?

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Hey Dave. Sorry for the slow reply on this, but I've been travelling, and when I first read your post I knew I couldn't just drop in a quick response on this one.

 

I would say you are not misunderstanding what is happening, but there are good reasons for the madness that is the overall ranking system in the Compiler.

 

There are a couple reasons for adjusting the value of different positions. While in a perfect world, you probably would not adjust the positions at all, because a point is a point, this isn't a perfect world. We're trying to project performance of all these players and defenses, and some positions are more difficult to project than others.

 

The reason defenses are downgraded is because they are very difficult to project. They are very random the way they score from week to week, and also year to year there is quite a bit of turnover in the rankings. Therefore, even in a league with very high scoring for defense you don't usually want to take one early because you are more likely to error in the projections PLUS you are more likely to be able to draft an unexpected high performing defense much later. Even pick one up off waivers. Or play matchups and play add/drop defenses all year, depending in part how deep your league is and the number available on waivers. In most leagues (12 teams start 1), there are acceptable choices on waivers. Maybe not in your league since you start 2 per team. But in general, why spend an early draft pick on one if you can score just as well drafting later.

 

The reason I downgrade QB is because there are so many that score similar to one another after Manning, and then after the next 3-4 say. There can be a big tier of QB from the 6/7 through 13 range. So unlike defense they are more predictable to project, but because they are more similar you can get away with drafting them later and getting an acceptable starter.

 

I disagree Last Starter is the only method that makes sense. I would say Median Player Drafted makes more sense. You know going into the season that you will be playing your backups, sometimes more than you like, but almost always they will play some due to bye weeks and minor injuries or matchups. Median Player Drafted helps you draft a better, deeper team.

 

If you use Last Starter it puts all the starters first at all positions, before it ranks any backups. Now what would you say is more valuable, your first backup RB or your starting K? I'd say RB in every league I'm in, because I know that RB will play for me while I can get a same value K later on. Median Player Drafted will rank backup RB ahead of starting K where appropriate.

 

The adjustments I put into the "Recommended" methods even more so, for most leagues based on my experience. The Stud RB and QBBC methods are more for alternative interest sake than being methods I would truly recommend using.

 

Final thoughts... you say your league starts 2 QB and 2 DEF. Okay, that is significant and does not fall into my "typical" league definition. In your case the adjustments with the Recommended method may be too much and downgrade QB, in particular, too much. For you I would suggest Median Player Drafted, no adjustments, and review the overall rankings after this as a start at least, and then make some minor adjustments if you think its warranted.

[dbergan 0]

Hi Mike,

 

I think I see where you're coming from... but (as always) I still have a couple questions.

 

First off you say that some positions, like Defenses, are harder to predict than others. I think you're right, but I'm wondering why the recommendation is to adjust the points after the fact rather than just adjusting the raw projection data. For example... let's say that you and I were 90% confident that Baltimore's defense was going to score 110 FF points this season (using a given scoring system) and 60% confident that they would score 150 points. (The numbers are coming out of my butt, just bear with me.) If that were the case it is probably our recommendation to plan that Baltimore will score 110. Now there are two ways to get 110 into our end product (the compiled cheatsheet), either [A] just project Baltimore to score 110, or project Baltimore to score 150 and then recommend that all defenses should scaled down by whatever percentage leaves Baltimore's final score at 110.

 

To me, (A) seems like the way to go... the raw projection data should only reflect numbers that we have at least 80% confidence in... we shouldn't throw a number out for Baltimore's defense that's "less realistic" than the number for Steven Jackson, and then assume everyone will scale down the former and not the latter.

 

"But," you may reply, "certain positions inherently leave us with less confidence... team defenses are just more of a luck thing than other positions." To some degree, yes, I can see that point. Kickers, for sure, are a complete crap shoot, as a writer for Yahoo eloquently stated it. (If it were my compiler, I would give all kickers the same value... picking based on jersey number is just as accurate as using any cheatsheet.) And I would say that the special teams portion of the standard FF team defense is also mostly based on flukes. Since our league doesn't like that much randomness (why play FF if you're just going to roll a couple 20-sided dice and add that to your score?), we got rid of both kickers and punt/kick returns - our team defense is just based on points allowed, sacks, interceptions, safeties, etc. And I would maintain, that the non-special-teams-team-defense is more predictable than a running back. The odds of Tomlinson getting injured in game #2 is far greater than the odds of a bus bomb taking out the entire Ravens defense.

 

Let's go back to confidence percentages. How much confidence do we have that LT will score at least 1 touchdown this season? 98%? How about 2 touchdowns? 97%? According to the compiler he's projected to make at least 23 touchdowns... but what confidence do we put behind that? Obviously, the higher the projection, the lower the confidence. Making a 2006 projection of 31 touchdowns for LT couldn't have had more than a 5% confidence... and no cheatsheet would have promised such an outrageous number, yet it did happen.

 

In other words, what I'm saying is that the projection aspect is always on the conservative side (ie high confidence percentages). So why, then, would we be making outlandish team defense projections to begin with, and then later on in the process scaling them down because the projections were outlandish?

 

I must be missing something...

 

Kind regards,

David

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Its not a case of projections for one team being overstated. The numbers are reasonable end of year numbers for defenses, but all defenses are unpredictable and could land above or below the projections because of the randomness of the position ... even for sacks and turnovers.

 

The important thing is the relative value of each defense. We expect BAL to be "this much" better than NYJ, CAR or CLE, for example. That is what we want the rankings to reflect. But we don't want all defenses to be overrated in the overall projections relative to the other positions, so that is what the adjustment is trying to accomplish.

 

If we adjusted projections, then maybe we would just make defense projections all identical (like you're suggesting for kickers), but then there would be no separation on the overall rankings for defense.

 

To be honest, I always exclude K and DEF from my overall rankings with that option on the setup tab. However I know some people don't do that, so if I create a product which tells someone to take a DEF in the 1st or 2nd round, then I'm providing a poor service with that advice.

[dbergan 0]

If we adjusted projections, then maybe we would just make defense projections all identical (like you're suggesting for kickers), but then there would be no separation on the overall rankings for defense.

 

Hi Mike,

 

Really? You honestly think that team defenses (minus special teams) are that random? Last year I took Chicago in round 4... they were projected high and they performed high. Same with Baltimore. When I look at kicker projections, I see no rhyme or reason to their performance... Jeff Wilkens can lead the pack one year, and fall to 23rd the next year - without an injury or any major offensive restructuring. A kicker's FF performance has nothing to do with the athlete's talent... it's just a matter of getting the opportunities (which is almost completely random). Wilkens's performance is primarily based on the lack of interceptions (and touchdowns) that Bulger throws, and how often the offense stalls in the red zone.

 

On the other hand, team defenses (minus special teams) perform fairly close to their talent level. The defense with the most skill is the one most likely to hold their opponents to a shut-out. Shut-outs score big in our league, so it's worth it to have a defense that can produce one.

 

And I'll extend the idea that in many ways a team defense is a safer bet than an individual player. Players are fickle... they can get injured, sick, benched, suspended, or holdout. A team defense will always be on the field (no need to handcuff). Sure Ray Lewis might break a leg, but Baltimore's defense will still probably give you at least 80% production without him. You have no such guarantees with Priest Holmes, who gave you either 100% or 0%.

 

 

Anyway, we don't need to keep going back and forth on this. I think what's mainly behind all this is that our league is abnormal in that we score defenses (minus special teams) in such a way that the good ones can perform as well as the elite running backs or quarterbacks. And we play 2 defenses each week. In standard leagues, team defense is an afterthought and hardly worth anything... where they play only 1 each week which guarantees some good options on the waivers. Since we crafted defense into a high-points position, it would be as dumb to ignore them through the main part of the draft as it would be to ignore quarterbacks.

 

So because you approach defenses from your point of view (mainly an afterthought), and I approach them from a league who wanted to make a viable, consistent, high-scoring position out of them we have different assumptions in how the cheatsheet should look. You think that the highest defense should probably be in about round 6 or 7 of the draft. I think it should be in round 1... where Baltimore is about as valuable as Peyton Manning.

 

 

Kind regards,

David

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Bump for 7/26 projection update. Open Compiler > Setup Tab > Click Update Projections

 

Hope to add player notes for training camp updates and to explain some projection changes over the next month in future updates.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Bump for 7/26 projection update. Open Compiler > Setup Tab > Click Update Projections

 

Hope to add player notes for training camp updates and to explain some projection changes over the next month in future updates.

 

Bump for 8/2 projection update. I did add some player notes for players in the news, and a few others.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Bump for 8/9 projections update. I changed a couple players notes, but there wasn't a lot more to say from the last week. We'll see if that changes this weekend after the preseason finally gets underway!

[dowata 0]

Dumb question - I have the compiler setup for 22 rounds but the draft buddy only shows 16. The only change I did from the default is change the number of rounds on the league setup page of the compiler. Is there something else I need to do?

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Hi dowata. You need to hit Setup Draft Buddy (on the setup tab in Buddy) for the changes you made - 22 rounds - to be reflected in Buddy.

[katk9 0]

This is my first year using the Cheatsheet Compiler/Draft Buddy, and it wasn't to bad. Will take some getting used to. I had to stop the input of the players part of the system, the draft was moving pretty quick. Went to the cheatsheets that I printed from the Compiler. I'm impress with my outcome.

 

Passing Yards (25 yards per point)

Passing Touchdowns (6)

Interceptions (-2)

Rushing Yards (10 yards per point)

Rushing Touchdowns (6)

Receptions (0.5)

Reception Yards (10 yards per point)

Reception Touchdowns (6)

Return Yards (25 yards per point)

Return Touchdowns (6)

2-Point Conversions (2)

Fumbles Lost (-2)

Offensive Fumble Return TD (6)

Field Goals 0-19 Yards (3)

Field Goals 20-29 Yards (3)

Field Goals 30-39 Yards (3)

Field Goals 40-49 Yards (4)

Field Goals 50+ Yards (5)

Field Goals Missed 0-19 Yards (-3)

Field Goals Missed 20-29 Yards (-2)

Point After Attempt Made (1)

Point After Attempt Missed (-2)

Sack (1)

Interception (2)

Fumble Recovery (2)

Touchdown (6)

Safety (2)

Block Kick (2)

Return Yards (20 yards per point)

Kickoff and Punt Return Touchdowns (6)

Points Allowed 0 points (10)

Points Allowed 1-6 points (7)

Points Allowed 7-13 points (4)

Points Allowed 14-20 points (1)

Points Allowed 21-27 points (0)

Points Allowed 28-34 points (-1)

Points Allowed 35+ points (-4)

Tackle Solo (1)

Tackle Assist (0.5)

Sack (2)

Interception (4)

Fumble Force (3)

Fumble Recovery (3)

Touchdown (6)

Safety (4)

Pass Defended (2)

Block Kick (4)

 

And, here are my draft results

 

1. (6) Joseph Addai RB

2. (15) Marshawn Lynch RB

3. (26) Edgerrin James RB

4. (35) Brandon Jacobs RB

5. (46) Antonio Gates TE

6. (55) Deion Branch WR

7. (66) Braylon Edwards WR

8. (75) Vince Young QB

9. (86) Terry Glenn WR

10. (95) Joey Galloway WR

11. (106) Champ Bailey DB

12. (115) Troy Polamalu DB

13. (126) Ronde Barber DB

14. (135) Ray Lewis DL

15. (146) Will Smith DL

16. (155) Miami DEF

17. (166) Jake Delhomme QB

18. (175) Tennessee DEF

19. (186) Joe Nedney K

 

[BigBlueAces 0]

I may be on the wrong forum, but, I wanted to ask the question and then do more research:

 

Is there a way to import my League Info from last year into the Compiler/Buddy this year?

 

Thanks!!!

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Yes BBA. There is a Copy League Profiles feature.

 

Open the 2006 file. Open the 2007 file and go to the update tab. Make sure the 2006 filename is correct, and hit the button. It will copy over all your league settings and scoring from '06.

[BigBlueAces 0]

Yes BBA. There is a Copy League Profiles feature.

 

Open the 2006 file. Open the 2007 file and go to the update tab. Make sure the 2006 filename is correct, and hit the button. It will copy over all your league settings and scoring from '06.

 

 

Thanks! Working on it now!!!

[jayjun 0]

Bump for 8/2 projection update. I did add some player notes for players in the news, and a few others.

 

 

I hit the update projections button today and something is rotten in Denmark with my QBs:

 

1 1 Bradlee Van Pelt HOU 10 #VALUE!

2 #VALUE! Jon Kitna DET 6 201.8 5.06

3 #VALUE! Marc Bulger STL 9 195.2 3.13

4 #VALUE! Eli Manning NYG 9 159.9 8.05

5 #VALUE! Vince Young TEN 4 158.2 7.03

6 #VALUE! Philip Rivers SD 7 154.3 6.05

7 #VALUE! Carson Palmer CIN 5 148.4 2.12

8 #VALUE! Matt Leinart ARI 8 147.7 6.11

9 #VALUE! Ben Roethlisberger PIT 6 138.9 8.14

10 #VALUE! Brett Favre GB 7 138.6 9.10

11 #VALUE! Steve McNair BAL 8 134.9 12.12

12 #VALUE! Tim Hasselbeck NYG 9 130.4

13 #VALUE! Trent Green MIA 9 128.9 11.06

14 #VALUE! J.P. Losman BUF 6 127.9 10.14

15 #VALUE! Jeff Garcia TB 10 127.6 11.06

16 #VALUE! Damon Huard KC 8 126.6

17 #VALUE! Michael Vick ATL 8 123.8

18 #VALUE! Chris Redman ATL 8 118.5

19 #VALUE! Donovan McNabb PHI 5 113.0 4.05

20 #VALUE! Kurt Warner ARI 8 109.8

21 #VALUE! Ken Dorsey CLE 7 105.8

22 #VALUE! Ryan Fitzpatrick STL 9 102.1

23 #VALUE! Kelly Holcomb PHI 5 101.9

24 #VALUE! Tyler Thigpen ® MIN 5 98.1

25 #VALUE! Peyton Manning IND 6 95.2 1.10

 

Any ideas?

[Mike MacGregor 20]

I think I need to see your Compiler to judge what is wrong. You can send it to me at compiler@fftoday.com.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

8/16 update is in the house

[Chasgh 0]

Hi Mike. Great job as usual! Not rushing you but my draft is tomorrow (23rd) and wanted to know what time you expected to have the 23rd update posted? I want to make sure I go to the draft with the most up to date information.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

It should be ready pretty early in the morning assuming no hiccups.

[Mike MacGregor 20]

Bump for 8/23 projection update.