 |
View Old Forum Thread
Old Forum Index » Sim Forums » Football Game & Site Questions » Ratings Vs. Production
underwig
Thank you
[Edited on 3-5-2011 by underwig]
Ratings Vs. Production
March 05, 2011 at 06:44AM View formatted
You are viewing the raw post code; this allows you to copy a message with BBCode formatting intact.
I have a question I've been curious about. I'm looking at the draft class at RB and there are a lot of B+ rated players for the position, but there is a B rated RB with A speed, A- agility, and A break tackle. It seems like these would be some of the most important traits for a running back. Is it possible that he could be more productive than a lot of the B+ rated RB's.. or is the overall rating the most important concern?
Thank you
[Edited on 3-5-2011 by underwig]
dsaved
And while we're here. I have a B TE, which is rated B+ in the WR role, and a bunch of B rated WRs, as well a B+ LB, rated A- in the DE role, that looks better than the B DEs. What I'm saying is that many players look better at their "roles", which I always thought it was some sort of a secondary position, than their true position. But is this true? I mean, an A- role is better than a B+ position? I see this as a primary issue, since we really have to set up roles, rather than positions in the depth charts.
March 05, 2011 at 11:12AM View BBCode
Thanks for opening this thread!! I've found myself wondering which set of skills is more important for a certain role, since they often are not reflected in the overall rating.And while we're here. I have a B TE, which is rated B+ in the WR role, and a bunch of B rated WRs, as well a B+ LB, rated A- in the DE role, that looks better than the B DEs. What I'm saying is that many players look better at their "roles", which I always thought it was some sort of a secondary position, than their true position. But is this true? I mean, an A- role is better than a B+ position? I see this as a primary issue, since we really have to set up roles, rather than positions in the depth charts.
Classics
[Edited on 3-5-2011 by Classics]
March 05, 2011 at 01:37PM View BBCode
A player's overall rating is a quick way to get a general sense of how good a player is, but should not be relied on too heavily to evaluate players. quote from players guide...Lots of helpful hints there..[Edited on 3-5-2011 by Classics]
Admin
Roles fill slots on the depth chart; some positions are better suited to some roles than others, and there is some overlap in skill sets especially on the defense.
This is often confusing, so much so that I nearly left the "best role" column out of the game. But while there are only 14 positions, there are some 56 roles. Why so many roles? Because each role may only appear once in a given formation.
Now, each role has a different set of criteria for its ratings. Some of these are identical to its parent; for example, the Flanker and Split End roles have exactly the same rating criteria as Wide Receiver, so you do not see those show up as a "best role". On the opposite side of the spectrum, there is no role for just "Safety". There is Strong Safety and Free Safety, and the overall grade for a Safety is an average of the grade at those two roles, so a Safety will never show "Safety" as his best role. Linebackers and RB's are in a similar situation.
Quarterbacks will often show a "best role" of Holder. Why is that? Because it's a lot easier to qualify for a high grade at Holder than it is at QB.
When a player is created, a template is used to create him that sets up his initial skills within certain ranges. It is possible, however, that his skills will be createed in a range that are actually suited to another position. His "player skills", represented by Execution, are in his native position, but all of his other skills are absolute. So if you put that LB in at DE, he will probably perform well, but he will make more mistakes in the form of things like penalties or other areas that are dependent on Execution. This can be a loophole around the salary cap in some ways, as an LB is less expensive than a DE.
Going back to the original comments about players being better than their ratings, yes that is definately possible. Let's take a look at QB's for example.
QB's are complicated because that position has more skills making up its raing than most. The rating consists of:
30% Throw Accuracy
20% Throw Power
10% Execution
10% Carrying
10% Hands
10% Agility
5% Speed
5% Break Tackle
Now these numbers aren't the entire story. Throw Accuracy and Throw Power are "key skills", which mean that anything at 40 or below is treated as a 0 and the rest of the range "stretched out" to match. This prevents someone with low throwing skills but high ratings at other attributes from appearing to be a passable quarterback. On the other hand, Speed, Agility and Break Tackle are graded on a curve; QB's simply won't have ratings in these areas as good as a top RB, so anything higher than an 85 is treated as 100 for the purposes of the rating and the rest of the range stretched to match. Without this, it would be impossible for a QB to get an A overall rating.
So, let's consider [url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=6]Jermaine Geyer[/url], who is a QB rated B+ overall. His ratings look like this:
30% Throw Accuracy: A+
20% Throw Power: A
10% Execution: C+
10% Carrying: C+
10% Hands: A
10% Agility: D
5% Speed: B-
5% Break Tackle: B+
So, what do we have here? That A for Throw Power is treated like a B+ for purposes of creating the overall grade, because while A is an awesome throwing power for any other position it's only above average for a QB. The Carrying and Agility weigh him down some, keeping him from getting into the A range overall. He's a great QB, though. He'll get sacked a bit more because of the lower Agility and will be less effective on bootleg plays, but if you are willing to overlook that he can be an awesome QB. If we were on the baseball side, it would be like he's a pitcher with A+ control, A velocity, and C- endurance; not perfect but hardly a player you would turn down.
--Chris
March 05, 2011 at 07:00PM View BBCode
Originally posted by dsaved
Thanks for opening this thread!! I've found myself wondering which set of skills is more important for a certain role, since they often are not reflected in the overall rating.
And while we're here. I have a B TE, which is rated B+ in the WR role, and a bunch of B rated WRs, as well a B+ LB, rated A- in the DE role, that looks better than the B DEs. What I'm saying is that many players look better at their "roles", which I always thought it was some sort of a secondary position, than their true position. But is this true? I mean, an A- role is better than a B+ position? I see this as a primary issue, since we really have to set up roles, rather than positions in the depth charts.
Roles fill slots on the depth chart; some positions are better suited to some roles than others, and there is some overlap in skill sets especially on the defense.
This is often confusing, so much so that I nearly left the "best role" column out of the game. But while there are only 14 positions, there are some 56 roles. Why so many roles? Because each role may only appear once in a given formation.
Now, each role has a different set of criteria for its ratings. Some of these are identical to its parent; for example, the Flanker and Split End roles have exactly the same rating criteria as Wide Receiver, so you do not see those show up as a "best role". On the opposite side of the spectrum, there is no role for just "Safety". There is Strong Safety and Free Safety, and the overall grade for a Safety is an average of the grade at those two roles, so a Safety will never show "Safety" as his best role. Linebackers and RB's are in a similar situation.
Quarterbacks will often show a "best role" of Holder. Why is that? Because it's a lot easier to qualify for a high grade at Holder than it is at QB.
When a player is created, a template is used to create him that sets up his initial skills within certain ranges. It is possible, however, that his skills will be createed in a range that are actually suited to another position. His "player skills", represented by Execution, are in his native position, but all of his other skills are absolute. So if you put that LB in at DE, he will probably perform well, but he will make more mistakes in the form of things like penalties or other areas that are dependent on Execution. This can be a loophole around the salary cap in some ways, as an LB is less expensive than a DE.
Going back to the original comments about players being better than their ratings, yes that is definately possible. Let's take a look at QB's for example.
QB's are complicated because that position has more skills making up its raing than most. The rating consists of:
30% Throw Accuracy
20% Throw Power
10% Execution
10% Carrying
10% Hands
10% Agility
5% Speed
5% Break Tackle
Now these numbers aren't the entire story. Throw Accuracy and Throw Power are "key skills", which mean that anything at 40 or below is treated as a 0 and the rest of the range "stretched out" to match. This prevents someone with low throwing skills but high ratings at other attributes from appearing to be a passable quarterback. On the other hand, Speed, Agility and Break Tackle are graded on a curve; QB's simply won't have ratings in these areas as good as a top RB, so anything higher than an 85 is treated as 100 for the purposes of the rating and the rest of the range stretched to match. Without this, it would be impossible for a QB to get an A overall rating.
So, let's consider [url=http://football.simdynasty.com/player.jsp?id=6]Jermaine Geyer[/url], who is a QB rated B+ overall. His ratings look like this:
30% Throw Accuracy: A+
20% Throw Power: A
10% Execution: C+
10% Carrying: C+
10% Hands: A
10% Agility: D
5% Speed: B-
5% Break Tackle: B+
So, what do we have here? That A for Throw Power is treated like a B+ for purposes of creating the overall grade, because while A is an awesome throwing power for any other position it's only above average for a QB. The Carrying and Agility weigh him down some, keeping him from getting into the A range overall. He's a great QB, though. He'll get sacked a bit more because of the lower Agility and will be less effective on bootleg plays, but if you are willing to overlook that he can be an awesome QB. If we were on the baseball side, it would be like he's a pitcher with A+ control, A velocity, and C- endurance; not perfect but hardly a player you would turn down.
--Chris
redcped
For instance, in the Brett Favre league, we have 22 DE rated A- or A. Meanwhile there is 1 A- OT and only 8 B+.
Similarly there are 44 CB rated B+ or better but just 19 WR.
It stands to reason that there should be something closer to a balance between the abilities of these players, and my suspicion is that the overall grades could be misleading here.
Then again, looking at the passing stats in the league, maybe the pressure and secondaries are just a lot better:
http://football.simdynasty.com/teamstats.jsp?mode=pass&lid=11
March 05, 2011 at 07:31PM View BBCode
Chris, is it possible that some positions are harder to get better overall grades in?For instance, in the Brett Favre league, we have 22 DE rated A- or A. Meanwhile there is 1 A- OT and only 8 B+.
Similarly there are 44 CB rated B+ or better but just 19 WR.
It stands to reason that there should be something closer to a balance between the abilities of these players, and my suspicion is that the overall grades could be misleading here.
Then again, looking at the passing stats in the league, maybe the pressure and secondaries are just a lot better:
http://football.simdynasty.com/teamstats.jsp?mode=pass&lid=11
Admin
Absolutely. Generally, the more factors a position is rated in, the harder it is to get a high rating. DT's and DE's are especially problematic because after the game was released, I found serious bugs in how their overall grades were calculated. I corrected the bugs but was unable to rebalance them as it would affect all of the existing leagues. I'm not quite sure what to do about that.
Overall grades are really only useful in comparing to others in the same position for the most part. It's like comparing a pitcher to a hitter on the baseball side. They do need to be balanced better, though, but I have to make ratings changes slowly and carefully now that leagues are playing. People will not be happy if their players' overall ratings suddenly drop!
--Chris
March 05, 2011 at 08:02PM View BBCode
Originally posted by redcped
Chris, is it possible that some positions are harder to get better overall grades in?
Absolutely. Generally, the more factors a position is rated in, the harder it is to get a high rating. DT's and DE's are especially problematic because after the game was released, I found serious bugs in how their overall grades were calculated. I corrected the bugs but was unable to rebalance them as it would affect all of the existing leagues. I'm not quite sure what to do about that.
It stands to reason that there should be something closer to a balance between the abilities of these players, and my suspicion is that the overall grades could be misleading here.
Overall grades are really only useful in comparing to others in the same position for the most part. It's like comparing a pitcher to a hitter on the baseball side. They do need to be balanced better, though, but I have to make ratings changes slowly and carefully now that leagues are playing. People will not be happy if their players' overall ratings suddenly drop!
--Chris
Pages: 1