Why not move between equivalent positions?

[Wheeler Dealer]

Why not move between equivalent positions?

What are the pro's and con's of moving players between RT-LT, RG-LG or RE-LE, ROLB-LOLB.

[browns_nation]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

Because the schemes and what you're looking for in a player matters. in this case. Say, You move a Right tackle to play left tackle it simply comes down to attributes. Your right tackle might be good at what he does but if he doesnt equal or surpass your left tackle in strength, awareness, run/pass blocking, impact blocking, etc then hes going to get beat alot more often than the mauler you got at left tackle already. at least thats how I grade value when considering switching players to a different position.

I run a 3-4 so Im always looking for defensive tackles to convert to defense ends and defensive ends to linebackers, block shed, power move and speed(for linebackers) are the attributes I consider the "must have" when making these changes.

hoped that helped

[Skarecrow]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

I do it all the time. Some draft paths lack a lot of depth at certain positions. The english path for instance gives you maybe 4 or 5 good LTs for every good RT you get, so getting a 3rd round LT and moving him to RT might make a lot of sense instead of fighting for the only quality RT (who goes in the first round). Similarly finding a good CB in english is hard, especially outside of the first round, but finding a SS or FS who can convert to good CB are fairly common.

Or maybe there are an equally good number of players at the equivalent positions, but not the year you need one.

or maybe you've already got two stud DTs and your GM invites a diamond-in-the-rough DT to camp for no good reason. you don't want to dump him out to FA and let the other teams have him... are you shallow at LE maybe?

Maybe that high profile LOLB you drafted is a bust at his position, too slow for your scheme, and now he's eating up a big chunk of cap space, and dumping him would be an ugly salary cap penalty. What if you moved him to LE though? What is his potential there? or MLB?

Maybe you picked up a new star HB this year, and that pushes another of your guys down the depth chart to HB position 4. the guy isn't bad, he's just nothing special. Have you tried switching him to FB or TE to see if he's better than the worst guy you've got there? your "least" HB may be a better TE than your worst TE, especially early in a franchise when you've still got the dregs of the original roster. I always carry 3 TEs even though I only use 2, for special teams reasons. same with centers, for fatigue reasons. replacing the #3 guy with someone who might be a 'cast-off' from another position may be worthwhile.

I move people all the time, for all sorts of reasons. The only real con is that it resets their production stat back to 0, which is annoying for people who live and breath stats, but can actually be beneficial in some circumstances.

[shadowman]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

I move guys all the time too, especially if it's a player that's been on my team for awhile. I think of it as a loyalty to my players. I would rather move a player to a new position then cut them.

[Wheeler Dealer]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

Let's take a simple case. My two best DEs are both LEs. I can just put one as the starter at RE in the depth chart and go about my business or I can move one to RE on the roster. It makes everything look more organized!

There are two things that are obvious when you move a player to a new position, his production goes to zero and sometimes, with older players, their OVL rating changes. It seems that lack of work will cause the rating to fall. Moving the player rubs off some of the "rust". IIRC it can also eliminate some of the gains the player has made.

I'm not sure that the rating change cause by moving a player matters. It seems to move back in the direction of the "earned" rating more quickly than it moved originally. On top of that, I've had a RB lose rating points but continue to perform the same as far as I could tell. Could be just too small a sample I suppose.

So what's the good and bad of moving one of my LEs to RE on the roster vs. just having him start at the opposite position?

[Skarecrow]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

there are limits on accumulating production outside of your given position.

I know a lolb isnt going to acculate production as a DT. would he accumulate as rolb? maybe, i'm not sure.

I routinely have something like a lolb as the 3rd depth position on my rolb. hell, the computer teams even do that. i've had the same good MLB (just not quite as much a stud as my #1 mlb) as the 2nd depth slot on all 3 linebacker charts. etc.

no real penalty that i know of.

speaking of which, the drop in ovl you're seeing upon moving a player is, i'm fairly convinced, related to their loss of production. ovl is simply a metric to compare players by, the game doesn't use ovl in any of its calculations during a game. think of ovl as something like a grade point average (GPA). it's the average of all the important stats a player has and the performance the player is capable of. if he has a particularly high production, it will bump up the ovl. erase that production (by changing positions) and it drops back down to a more raw value. you don't see this with every player because there are always some players who perform "over and above".

[skipqtexas]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

From my expirence you can move a RT to LT. From what I saw a LG won't be as effective as a RG. I tried putting a star RE in in my 3-4 at LE and it didn't work.

I moved a CB to free safety and he turned out to be better at FS traded him and go a 2nd round pick

I moved a Sean Taylor Cloan FS from usc London Caldwell and he was a topp 3 corner in the league. Was dangerous to throw to got 8 picks. IS even better at Free Safety. HOF at FS or Corner one of the reasons I had the number 1 pass defense fo 3/4 of the year.

you can move some wr's to corner

[Wheeler Dealer]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

speaking of which, the drop in ovl you're seeing upon moving a player is, i'm fairly convinced, related to their loss of production. ovl is simply a metric to compare players by, the game doesn't use ovl in any of its calculations during a game. think of ovl as something like a grade point average (GPA). it's the average of all the important stats a player has and the performance the player is capable of. if he has a particularly high production, it will bump up the ovl. erase that production (by changing positions) and it drops back down to a more raw value. you don't see this with every player because there are always some players who perform "over and above".

Here's an example from today. I had a MLB (79/79) (27 years old, 7 years played, helathy) who had been getting good playing time for two years but I was about to cut him. He showed up on the depth chart as a 77 at OLB and my starting ROLB was only a 79. So I moved him and his rating popped up to 81/81 and he snatches a starting job instead of a ticket home.

One game and his rating at OLB has dropped to 80/80. So if the OVL is his "grade" of what he should do (based on all the individual stats) modified by production then he should perform at 81 but because his production is poor for 7 years experience his grade is 80. That makes sense I guess!

Not sure why he gets a lower grade for playing OLB when he's a MLB than when he's an OLB but it seems to be consistent.

I have a HB I drafted in 2008 with one team and now I have him again in 2014 with another team. His ratings started at 68/90 and I had visions of sugar plums for my 6th round steal. His OVL is currently 73/81, about as high as ever but he still does a good job for a backup HB. Doesn't fumble, breaks tackles and grinds out a little over 3 Y/C. And he's healthy and cheap!

A slightly different observation that doesn't quite fit the "grade" model. Many players, it's easiest to see in WR, will have a lower rating midseason than at the beginning or at the end. That implies a seasonal production modification but if you observe a HB over time, particularly one that isn't starting, you can see his rating go down from year to year. Start a franchise in Miami and watch Lorenzo Booker.

[Wheeler Dealer]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

ovl is simply a metric to compare players by, the game doesn't use ovl in any of its calculations during a game. think of ovl as something like a grade point average (GPA).

While woolgathering......... I'll bet the OVL is used in trades, FA asking price and extension negotiations.

After all, the OVL is apparently the program's perception of value and that's what all those transactions are about.

I'll bet you could attract a better offer if you moved an underused player away from and back to his best position. Kind of like washing your car before offering to sell it. That might be pretty easy to test.

If you find an OL in the FA pool with a low current rating and a high potential you could hold him out of the lineup until his extension negotiation starts.

I haven't decided whether that would be clever management or abuse of program loopholes. To each his own I suppose.

[jesrockz]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

While woolgathering......... I'll bet the OVL is used in trades, FA asking price and extension negotiations.

After all, the OVL is apparently the program's perception of value and that's what all those transactions are about.

I wish this was the case. It seems to me like the players are fully aware of their Potential. For instance, I have a TE right now that is asking for a contract. His OVL is 79 and the turd wants 4M a year! Why? Because his Potential is 87. Fricken jerk knows his future value. And it's not just this example. I've seen it over and over again at all positions.

[bblack1207]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

I do it quite a bit, especially during Training Camp and early pre-season. They usually "Learn Plays" and develop the new position skill better and what was lost by doing that usually comes together quickly by the first couple of Regular Season Games.
Micheal Boley (LB) became a Consistent Pro Bowl Star at DT and actually led the league in tackles for 2 straight years.
Tony Bake (RE) became a Pro Bowler and stellar Defensive Star at RLB for me Eventually developing an Overall 95 with a 97 Potential.
Heath Miller (TE) led had 109 Receptions after converting to FB in a West coast offense.
I wanted a running QB after John Johnson (QB) suddenly disappeared in my 5th Season so I converted Harry Douglas (WR) to my 3rd String QB and he became a dependable running QB while in one particular game throwing for 291 Yards- 3 TD's, and running for 187 and 3 TD's.
So it's a Gamble but depending on your Scheme it can work out.

[jesrockz]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

I do it quite a bit, especially during Training Camp and early pre-season. They usually "Learn Plays" and develop the new position skill better and what was lost by doing that usually comes together quickly by the first couple of Regular Season Games.
Micheal Boley (LB) became a Consistent Pro Bowl Star at DT and actually led the league in tackles for 2 straight years.
Tony Bake (RE) became a Pro Bowler and stellar Defensive Star at RLB for me Eventually developing an Overall 95 with a 97 Potential.
Heath Miller (TE) led had 109 Receptions after converting to FB in a West coast offense.
I wanted a running QB after John Johnson (QB) suddenly disappeared in my 5th Season so I converted Harry Douglas (WR) to my 3rd String QB and he became a dependable running QB while in one particular game throwing for 291 Yards- 3 TD's, and running for 187 and 3 TD's.
So it's a Gamble but depending on your Scheme it can work out.

That's odd...I have Boley and Bake on my team right now. Both studs, but I have them at their default positions. And how on earth could a DT lead the league in tackles?

[Wheeler Dealer]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

I wish this was the case. It seems to me like the players are fully aware of their Potential. For instance, I have a TE right now that is asking for a contract. His OVL is 79 and the turd wants 4M a year! Why? Because his Potential is 87. Fricken jerk knows his future value. And it's not just this example. I've seen it over and over again at all positions.

I don't have hard data about extensions, but I do have data on the asking prices for free agents. I noted the asking prices for all the free agents that came up for bids before the draft for 2010 and 2011 in the Sweetney path. That was about 100 FAs each year.

Free agents with the about same overall rating all want very nearly the same annual contract. The older they are, the shorter the contract they ask for. I have about 60 examples that confirm this and no exceptions.

I do believe the asking price is for a "balanced" priority so my priorities put some variation into the data.

My data would lead me to believe you could find an 81 TE (Shockey) asking $4M/yr and an 80 TE (D. Thomas) asking $3.6/yr in 2011 bidding. Antonio Gates, 91 OVL, wanted $6M/year. Sometimes the other teams drive the actual price above the asking price, particularly for superstars or in positions where quality talent is thin.

Don't let your money get mad! If you can't do better, then $4M/yr is a good deal.

If you are comparing the extension request or the bid asking price to the FA price for those that can't get jobs, yeah you can get those guys for the minimum, maybe $900K for one year.

My first year in Washington (2012) I had two OL, rookie FA on one year contracts. They both had much higher potential than current OVL. If memory serves, the RG was something like 75/87. I did not put him into the starting lineup until his negotiation started. I got him for thee years, $990K total and he quickly moved to 86/87 once he was starting. I have no examples of a RG on the market before the draft. LGs around 80 were going for about $2.5M/year.

I had a RT that was about 81/89. I got him for 5 years, $2.1M/yr. RTs in the 89-90 range were going for around $5M/year in FA bidding (3 examples). He moved up to 89/90 before year end once I put him in the starting lineup.

My conclusion is that the asking price for extensions is based on current OVL, not potential. The only other way I can think of to account for those differences would be a "home town discount" for in season negotiations. I don't think that is the case.

[jesrockz]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

Is it normal for a 75 OVR QB to want 3.5M a year?

[Wheeler Dealer]

Re: Why not move between equivalent positions?

Is it normal for a 75 OVR QB to want 3.5M a year?

That sounds about right. Most of those guys usually come up after the "top 100".

The closest match from my notes was Byron Leftwich with 76 ovl wanted $7.2M for a 2 year contract in 2010. Chad Pennington was a 77 ovl and he wanted $7.0M for 2 years in 2011.

If you want a 75 QB you can shop for a spot where you are the only bidder. That will get you about a 20% discount. Leftwich had only one bidder and he went for $5.5M for 2 years.

It appears the bid prices are appropriate for a starter and the prices off the FA list are about right for backup players.

I've made a "house rule" for myself. I only sign starters by bidding. You can cause an auction to occur by adding and dropping a player.