Punishing Hitter

QuikSand · 03-08-2006, 10:27 AM

Sounds great to me. I'd rather have a guy with a high rating there than a low one, I guess.

The help file for the draft file generator includes this less-than-helpful nugget:

Quote:

Hard Hitter - ability to punish the ball carrier.

Am I missing something else in-game that might shed some light? (Certainly possible)

I have heard speculation that this relates to tiring out or injuring offensive players, to creating turnovers, to special teams play... and so forth. But as nearly as I can tell, it's all speculation.

In my model of dice-rolling that I see FOF using to determine outcomes of plays, I have trouble seeing here this rating fits in. Does it make a defender's tackle harder to elude? Is it something like what's speculated above - more injuries, more turnovers, or something like that? What is it?

Anyone have any evidence what this translates to in the game?

Warhammer · 03-08-2006, 10:31 AM

Completely anecdotal evidence, but it seems that when I have more punishing hitters on defense I force more fumbles. I haven't noticed any increases in injuries.

albionmoonlight · 03-08-2006, 12:39 PM

The only way I can see to test this is to run the same game over and over against the same team--half the time with defenders with high punishing hitter and half the time with low punishing hitter--and then see what the box scores tell you. That would take a lot of work, because you would have to see if the other team is subbing more (for fatigue) or dropping more passes, or fumbling more, or getting more injuries by the end of the game.

You could not look at one factor in isolation like you can for some tests.

QuikSand · 03-08-2006, 01:13 PM

Maybe with somebody's league/player file generator, one could create a league with doctored PH numbers, to try to do some leaguewide comparisons?

Hmmmm...

WSUCougar · 03-08-2006, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Warhammer

Completely anecdotal evidence, but it seems that when I have more punishing hitters on defense I force more fumbles. I haven't noticed any increases in injuries.

Same. I recall one LB in particular had a very high punishing hitter rating and consistently forced a lot of fumbles.

fantastic flying froggies · 03-08-2006, 03:54 PM

I'll third the 'fumble forcing' impression (keyword there).

If you look at league leaders in fumbles forced, you will usually see players with high-ish punishing rating. Of course, there is also the occasional guy with no punishing skill at all, just enough to throw things off...

Icy · 03-08-2006, 05:26 PM

I always thought too that punishing hitter = fumble forcing. About creating more injuries, never saw any evidence of that.

Vinatieri for Prez · 03-09-2006, 01:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fantastic flying froggies

I'll third the 'fumble forcing' impression (keyword there).

If you look at league leaders in fumbles forced, you will usually see players with high-ish punishing rating. Of course, there is also the occasional guy with no punishing skill at all, just enough to throw things off...

This is exacty what I'm seeing. However, I apply little value to this rating without more confirmation of how this works.

Buzzbee · 03-09-2006, 09:49 PM

Perhaps it is related to forcing fumbles, but for some reason that just doesn't seem to complete the picture for me.

Let me explain. Look at the league leaders in Forced Fumbles (FF). What is the highest you've ever seen? In looking at IHOF, through 15 games our high is 5. Then two players with 4, and then a bunch of 3s. Pretty narrow range. Seems illogical that an entire rating would be used to determine something with such a small chance of happening. Toss in that ball carriers have an avoid fumbles rating and you have just reduced the effect of PH by half.

That doesn't mean that it may not be used at all. Rather I think it probably is a factor in determining fumbles, but that is a secondary use.

Someone mentioned a theory at one time (I think here in the strategies forum) that PH had an effect on the opposing players endurance. IIRC they cited the play-calling screen where I believe a player's endurance is displayed (not sure since I don't play-call). If that is the case, the perhaps someone could take QS's idea of creating a high PH league and a low PH league and seeing what the effects (if any) are shown for the offensive player's endurance.

If the theory holds, the high PH league should result in ball carriers seeing significantly reduced endurance when compared to the low PH league.

Just my $0.02.

Vinatieri for Prez · 03-09-2006, 11:43 PM

I like the theory, but without confirmation, I find it hard to apply much value to this rating.

cthomer5000 · 04-20-2006, 11:10 PM

I always forget to bring this stuff up, but perhaps there is some clue in the other descriptions the game sometimes uses.

For example, when you look at a scouting report, a player who is best in punshing hitter will get the comment "Excellent Hitting Ball Carriers." When I read that, I can't held but think it has to be directly related to forcing fumbles.

yabanci · 04-21-2006, 05:49 AM

Punishing hitter roughly correlates with strength, as does power inside and courage. Just as there is a comparison when determining an outcome of a play between, for example, run blocking and run defense, there might be an additional comparison between power inside and punishing hitter on a run play, or courage over the middle and punishing hitter on a pass play. It might factor into fumble determination as well, as people have suggested, and perhaps even endurance.

That's the way I've looked at it. It makes sense that if you have a receiver with low courage over the middle and a DB with high punishing hitter, you're more likely to get an incomplete pass than the note that "the receiver risked taking quite a hit in order to convert the play" (which I attribute to the receiver's courage at work). I'm just speculating based on observations, but I think it's more than simply determining fumbles.

That being said, it's not a big factor for me in evaluating a player. I'd obviously rather have a player with high punishing hitter rating than low, but a low rating doesn't scare me away.

cthomer5000 · 04-21-2006, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by yabanci

That being said, it's not a big factor for me in evaluating a player. I'd obviously rather have a player with high punishing hitter rating than low, but a low rating doesn't scare me away.

I'm on the same page. To me there are a number of ratings I view as secondary, and that is definitely one of them.

03-08-2006, 03:54 PM	#6
fantastic flying froggies Pro Rookie Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Sunny South of France	I'll third the 'fumble forcing' impression (keyword there). If you look at league leaders in fumbles forced, you will usually see players with high-ish punishing rating. Of course, there is also the occasional guy with no punishing skill at all, just enough to throw things off... __________________ Detroit Vampires (CFL) : Ve 're coming for your blood! Camargue Flamingos (WOOF): pretty in Pink

03-08-2006, 05:26 PM	#7
Icy Pro Starter Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Toledo - Spain	I always thought too that punishing hitter = fumble forcing. About creating more injuries, never saw any evidence of that. __________________

03-09-2006, 09:49 PM	#9
Buzzbee College Starter Join Date: Jun 2002	Perhaps it is related to forcing fumbles, but for some reason that just doesn't seem to complete the picture for me. Let me explain. Look at the league leaders in Forced Fumbles (FF). What is the highest you've ever seen? In looking at IHOF, through 15 games our high is 5. Then two players with 4, and then a bunch of 3s. Pretty narrow range. Seems illogical that an entire rating would be used to determine something with such a small chance of happening. Toss in that ball carriers have an avoid fumbles rating and you have just reduced the effect of PH by half. That doesn't mean that it may not be used at all. Rather I think it probably is a factor in determining fumbles, but that is a secondary use. Someone mentioned a theory at one time (I think here in the strategies forum) that PH had an effect on the opposing players endurance. IIRC they cited the play-calling screen where I believe a player's endurance is displayed (not sure since I don't play-call). If that is the case, the perhaps someone could take QS's idea of creating a high PH league and a low PH league and seeing what the effects (if any) are shown for the offensive player's endurance. If the theory holds, the high PH league should result in ball carriers seeing significantly reduced endurance when compared to the low PH league. Just my $0.02. __________________ Ability is what you're capable of doing. Motivation determines what you do. Attitude determines how well you do it. - Lou Holtz

03-08-2006, 10:31 AM	#2
Warhammer Pro Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Dayton, OH	Completely anecdotal evidence, but it seems that when I have more punishing hitters on defense I force more fumbles. I haven't noticed any increases in injuries.

03-08-2006, 12:39 PM	#3
albionmoonlight Head Coach Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: North Carolina	The only way I can see to test this is to run the same game over and over against the same team--half the time with defenders with high punishing hitter and half the time with low punishing hitter--and then see what the box scores tell you. That would take a lot of work, because you would have to see if the other team is subbing more (for fatigue) or dropping more passes, or fumbling more, or getting more injuries by the end of the game. You could not look at one factor in isolation like you can for some tests.

03-08-2006, 01:13 PM	#4
QuikSand lolzcat Join Date: Oct 2000 Location: Annapolis, Md	Maybe with somebody's league/player file generator, one could create a league with doctored PH numbers, to try to do some leaguewide comparisons? Hmmmm...

03-09-2006, 11:43 PM	#10
Vinatieri for Prez College Starter Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Seattle	I like the theory, but without confirmation, I find it hard to apply much value to this rating.

04-21-2006, 05:49 AM	#12
yabanci College Benchwarmer Join Date: Jun 2003	Punishing hitter roughly correlates with strength, as does power inside and courage. Just as there is a comparison when determining an outcome of a play between, for example, run blocking and run defense, there might be an additional comparison between power inside and punishing hitter on a run play, or courage over the middle and punishing hitter on a pass play. It might factor into fumble determination as well, as people have suggested, and perhaps even endurance. That's the way I've looked at it. It makes sense that if you have a receiver with low courage over the middle and a DB with high punishing hitter, you're more likely to get an incomplete pass than the note that "the receiver risked taking quite a hit in order to convert the play" (which I attribute to the receiver's courage at work). I'm just speculating based on observations, but I think it's more than simply determining fumbles. That being said, it's not a big factor for me in evaluating a player. I'd obviously rather have a player with high punishing hitter rating than low, but a low rating doesn't scare me away.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)