ESPN

It always amuses me to read some of the comments that get posted after we here at ESPN list our fantasy football rankings each week. The bulk of them call into question the expertise of those doing the ranking, and usually because "how could they possibly rank Player X so low when he is a superstar and far better than Player Y, who they ranked way too high?" or some such posturing. The fact of the matter is that nobody knows for certain how a player is going to perform on any given Sunday. If we did, there'd be no need to post predictions, nor any real reason to even watch the games. The uncertainty is what makes it all so much fun.

The main reason that our ESPN raters are in fact the very experts that they claim to be is that they are able to divorce their selections from the names on the backs of the players' jerseys and they have a logical reason for each of their rankings. Results don't always follow logic, but that doesn't make their opinions wrong. But let's face it: Most of you make your decisions based on names. That's why if the experts had ranked Derek Anderson as the No. 2 quarterback in Week 2's predictions, they'd have been raked over the coals. So what if it turned out to be true? It is far safer to rank Peyton Manning No. 1 each week, and on the off chance he has a bad game and is the No. 15 quarterback, nobody will complain because the pick went with the superstar instead of against him.

Some people suffer from what I like to call "PBSS" or "Psychic, But Stupid Syndrome." You see it all the time at the blackjack table. A player sticks on 16 against a dealer's face card. The next card out of the shoe is a five. "I knew it! I knew it!" Really? So you're psychic, since you knew it, yet you stuck, meaning you're stupid because you voluntarily passed on the 21 you knew you were going to get if you hit.

The same goes for fantasy football players. Faced with a tough lineup choice, if they go with the guy who has a bad day, they'll scream, "I knew it!" And then they'll look for someone else to blame. The truth is, even if you suspect your star player is facing a tough matchup, it is still the right play to start him. Over time, the best players will reward you far more often than let you down, and going with your "gut" almost always ends in regret. And if you don't believe me, just ask anyone who sat Anquan Boldin because he was facing a tough Ravens defense and started Jerry Porter facing the Browns instead.

This type of thinking carries over into far too many fantasy leagues. Owners who play in leagues in which trades can be vetoed, either by leaguewide vote or simply by commissioner's prerogative, can find a very reasonable deal nixed simply because of the names involved. An owner in a 14-team league, who has found himself suddenly short at running back due to injuries, attempted to make the following deal. Would you veto it?

He wanted to send his top receiver, who had caught passes for about 170 yards in the first two weeks, in exchange for two running backs, one who rushed for 209 yards and the other who had 179. Let the deal go through or cause a big stink? In fact, it got vetoed, in large part because the commissioner in question felt that since the output of the two running backs was twice the output of the wide receiver, it was an unfair deal. And so, the trade of Marvin Harrison for Chris Brown and Derrick Ward never took place. Well, that's just silly! If anything, the deal wasn't enough for Harrison, not too much. You have to take into account the situation of the players involved, not just the stats and not just the names.

Interestingly enough, the same stats could have described the following deal: Shaun McDonald for Joseph Addai and Shaun Alexander. Would that have been grossly unfair? Yes! But not because of the names involved. It's because Addai and Alexander are both full-time, no-questions-asked NFL starters. Brown had an unreal Week 1, but is splitting time with LenDale White. Ward is only playing due to the injury to Brandon Jacobs, and although he has done very well, there is no guarantee he remains the starter when Jacobs returns. That's the way you evaluate a deal. But I guarantee you, if the trade was McDonald for Brown and Ward, that commissioner would not have had a problem letting it through. It sounds contradictive, but it's the fact that Marvin Harrison -- a name -- was involved at all which made the deal subject to scrutiny, and that scrutiny itself does not always follow a logical conclusion. Be it "too much for a 170-yard receiver" or "not enough for a future Hall of Famer," when there are "names" involved, the deal looks a lot different. e.

It's the reason a deal involving a QB swap of Donovan McNabb for Jason Campbell would probably be dismissed in most leagues, even though the two had nearly identical numbers through two weeks of play. It's the reason Sean McHugh for Chris Cooley wouldn't pass most leagues' laugh test, despite comparable stats. And while nobody in their right mind would recommend trading Frank Gore for Earnest Graham straight up … if an owner had, the deal likely would have been vetoed, even though as we saw, the results for Week 3 clearly favored Graham.

Every week is different. Over the course of a season, the true stars will shine. But for one Sunday, anything can happen. Don't get so upset if someone is bold enough to predict a down week for your favorite son and don't get so hung up on the names that you find yourself hung out to dry.

All rise … The Court has now adjourned!

A.J. Mass is a fantasy football, baseball and college basketball analyst for ESPN.com. You can e-mail him here.