Scout Impression: Hard to Read? (and other draft discussion)

[Chubby]

Great, fantastic. That's a big help...


It seems as if the "underrated"/"overrated" tages are backwards now too... ("overrated" for studs) or their bars are hidden: you get a closer view but it doesn't take the how they are rated into effect like it did before. thoughts?

[cthomer5000]

I don't know how you could ever say it was "backwards" unless you are programming the game. Without knowing precisely what it's supposed to be doing I can't see how we can make that kind of observation.

Are you asking if the meanings of the terms have been switched since 6.0d? And what hidden bars are you talking about?

Maybe it's the structure of your sentence, but I'm not entirely clear on what you're saying or what you're asking.

[michael1123]

Scouting the draft does seem weird now. I'm thinking that the bars are a lot less accurate and the impression, which use to basically compare the bars to where they were listed, now tells you if they're better or worse than their bars indicate.

I'm playing a historical single player game and I'm noticing some star players with really bad looking bars. Example, CB Ronde Barber, with all bars around the 25/100 mark. I interview him and his bars go down a bit but it says very underrated. I'm guessing his bars are just flat out wrong?

For running backs its similar. There's 4 big running backs in this draft (1997) in Priest Holmes, Corey Dillion, Warrick Dunn, and Tiki Barber. Tiki has the lowest bars of the bunch but gets underrated. Dunn looks like you'd expect, great speed, not good running inside, great reciever and he gets hard to read. Dillion has the best bars of the bunch and even did a bit better than Holmes in the combine but is the 2nd rated back to Holmes (barely) and gets overrated while Holmes (who also has great bars) gets underrated.

Tony Gonazalez also has very bad looking bars (including after the interview) and he gets very underrated.

You'd think that the bars should change to reflect the interview impressions but it doesn't seem like that's the case. Nevertheless, I think interviewing is a lot more important now. Before I could usually predict what the interview result would be and now I have no clue as it seems to indicate ability that's not shown with the bars or combine results.

[michael1123]

Despite my better judgement I decided to draft Ronde Barber near the end of the 2nd round as an experiment. I also drafted a DT in the 4th that was listed as very underrated and traded a boatload of picks (1.30 and 2 future 2nds and 2 future 3rds) to move up to 1.4 to get Priest Holmes to replace an extremely washed up Barry Sanders.

Barber was listed at a whopping 21/27 after the draft and my defensive tackle (Jason Ferguson) was 26/37. Despite being a contending team I've decided to keep them aboard to see how things progress.

As I expected Barber went to 22/31 after camp and Ferguson went up to 29/39. Even Holmes who was already 75/75 went up to 78/78 (and still has plenty of green showing).

I'm pretty sure the interviews now tell you who is likely to boom and bust.

[Ben E Lou]

Underrated/Very Underrated="I think this guy is better than his bars say he is."

Overrated/Very Overrated="I don't think this guy is as good as his bars say he is.

Hard To Read: "I'm not sure, and I got a commitment to the truth. I'm just keepin' it real."

[MizzouRah]

The funny thing for me is, I keep forgetting to interview players as I hit the last FA stage without thinking and even thought I draft high on the board players, they usually are not very good whatsoever. I'm a dumb ass.

I really wish there were 3 pop ups in the game.

Are you sure you want to proceed?

1. You can't change a player's weight after continuing.
2. You can't send someone to the summer league after continuing.
3. You can't interview draftees after continuing.

[cthomer5000]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

Underrated/Very Underrated="I think this guy is better than his bars say he is."

Overrated/Very Overrated="I don't think this guy is as good as his bars say he is.

Hard To Read: "I'm not sure, and I got a commitment to the truth. I'm just keepin' it real."

Ok, so the conensus is that the changes have been like this:

6.0d: scout impression is simply about whether they are better or worse than their listed ranking

6.0e: scout impression is about whether the player is better or worse than the visible bars

That's what we're sayin'?

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Ok, so the conensus is that the changes have been like this:

6.0d: scout impression is simply about whether they are better or worse than their listed ranking

6.0e: scout impression is about whether the player is better or worse than the visible bars

That's what we're sayin'?

6.0d: Yes.

6.0e I don't know about we, yet, but so far, that's my interpretation.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

6.0d: Yes.

6.0e I don't know about we, yet, but so far, that's my interpretation.

My thoughts on this without diving in deep.

Very Underrated: He's got the bars you see...but he had one heckuva combine.

Underrated: He's got these bars...and he did better than average at the combine

Overrated: He's got these bars...and he did worse at the combine than his peers

Very-overrated: He's got these bars...and he was a big dissapointment at the combine.

[timmynausea]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

6.0e I don't know about we, yet, but so far, that's my interpretation.

That is my impression as well.

[RedKingGold]

Originally Posted by Dutch

My thoughts on this without diving in deep.

Very Underrated: He's got the bars you see...but he had one heckuva combine.

Underrated: He's got these bars...and he did better than average at the combine

Overrated: He's got these bars...and he did worse at the combine than his peers

Very-overrated: He's got these bars...and he was a big dissapointment at the combine.

Based on what I've seen from Greg's extractor, I think this is not necessarily correct. I think that combine scores do not factor into scout's opinions (and still are relatively seperate).

[gstelmack]

If Under/Over rated mean he's better or worse than his post-Interview bars, then why on earth do I have orange bars at all? Shouldn't the orange bars reflect how good my scout thinks the guy is?

The more I play with drafts in 2k7, the more confused I get.

[Dutch]

Hmmm, after looking at the IHOF draft, most of the guys I would have predicted were "overrated" in 6.0d still tend to show up as "overrated". Not all, must enough to make me question the "flip".

[michael1123]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

If Under/Over rated mean he's better or worse than his post-Interview bars, then why on earth do I have orange bars at all? Shouldn't the orange bars reflect how good my scout thinks the guy is?

The more I play with drafts in 2k7, the more confused I get.

Yeah, that's what I said above. They definitely should, but its definitely not in this version. The bars can go down when you interview them and you can still get very underrated.

Likewise, releated to the combine, a guy can have bad bars and a bad combine and be very underrated because they're going to jump upwards after training camp.

Even weirder is that this is obviously factored into the draft rankings even though you can't see it without interviewing them. Case in point, Ronde Barber was graded as mid-second despite really bad bars and a well below average combine.

So it seems like the interviews tell you a lot more now but the bars and especially the combine results tell you less. Weird trade off.

[Dutch]

Originally Posted by Dutch

Hmmm, after looking at the IHOF draft, most of the guys I would have predicted were "overrated" in 6.0d still tend to show up as "overrated". Not all, must enough to make me question the "flip".

Actually, I take that back, it does appeared to be flippd (at least to some noticeable degree). It appears that Overrated and Underrated mean what we think they mean (or what we assumed them meant before we learned differently previous to 6.0e).

[WebEwbank]

I am, like the rest of you, somewhat perplexed (but fascinated).

In 6.0e I am finding that the blue potential bars seem to tell me more than in 6.0d - to the point that I will sometimes ignore the scout's opinion.

Possibly the scout's opinions, even when the scout is Very Good or better at that position and at Young Talent, tend to drift further or more often from reality than they did in 6.0d.

The draft is more than ever the center of the game as trading is tougher than ever and the free agent pool is much less rich (perhaps too small a sample to say that...yet).

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by cthomer5000

Ok, so the conensus is that the changes have been like this:

6.0d: scout impression is simply about whether they are better or worse than their listed ranking

6.0e: scout impression is about whether the player is better or worse than the visible bars

That's what we're sayin'?

I agree with that right now.

[MalcPow]

Originally Posted by michael1123

Yeah, that's what I said above. They definitely should, but its definitely not in this version. The bars can go down when you interview them and you can still get very underrated.

Likewise, releated to the combine, a guy can have bad bars and a bad combine and be very underrated because they're going to jump upwards after training camp.

Even weirder is that this is obviously factored into the draft rankings even though you can't see it without interviewing them. Case in point, Ronde Barber was graded as mid-second despite really bad bars and a well below average combine.

So it seems like the interviews tell you a lot more now but the bars and especially the combine results tell you less. Weird trade off.

Yeah it's looking like the post-interview orange bars are a clarification of your scout's initial rating of the player, and the over/under-rated tag is an assessment of whether or not the player might be better or worse than that. Conceptually it doesn't make much sense, but I think Jim was looking for some mechanism to make the interviews more worthwhile. As it was, simply looking at the blue bars would usually tell you if your scout would come back with an over or under-rated assessment because the discrepancy between the player's draft rating and the bars was often obvious, and the interviews served little purpose other than to reveal leadership or other qualities or to narrow a little a wide blue bar assessment.

Now it seems like the orange bars give you a better sense of your scout's first read on a guy by narrowing the blue bars, and then your scout is also saying 'you know what, we may have this guy underrated though.' Regardless of the difficult to conceptualize 'reality' where a scout might clarify his previous false assessment while simultaneously offering a drastically different over/under-rated assessment, the new system seems to offer a richer decision making platform. In just these first few drafts I've noticed myself taking much more care with my interviews now that I realize they might reveal a more valuable sense of how this guy might look post-camp. I think once we get over the concept hurdle we'll see this is a positive change that brings some usefulness to the interviews.

[Chubby]

ok, I'm curious if other people notice this.

I just began tracking the guys I'm picking inthe draft for my SP career. this past season I drafted three players, the 1st two start.

Emerson Kennedy - CB
Very Underrated
55/72 when selected
54/74 post camp
--/-- week 1
63/74 week 6
65/74 week 11
68/74 week 17

Gerald Wilcox - DT
Underrated
38/54 when selected
46/58 post camp
--/-- week 1
52/58 week 6
57/58 week 11
68/68 week 17

Charles Webe - DE
Very Underrated
19/19 when selected
21/25 post camp
--/-- week 1
21/25 week 6
21/25 week 11
21/25 week 17

I have CB and DT mentors.
Wilcox popping +10/+10 when he maxed out could be a clue about overrated/underrated. Are others seeing this?

[Sgran]

The patch turned my scout into a complete curmudgeon. 9 of the top 11 corners were "very overrated". the other 2 were hard to read.

[MizzouRah]

Originally Posted by Sgran

The patch turned my scout into a complete curmudgeon. 9 of the top 11 corners were "very overrated". the other 2 were hard to read.

At least you remember to interview them.

[Chubby]

I am firmly in the camp of believeing that underrated/overrated nows means what will happen to them when they fully develop.

Underrated means they will creep up in ratings (like Skydog's guy in his thread) with a possible boom once they hit originally projected max potential.

Overrated means they will take a ratings hit when they get maxed out.

I think both of those are tied to when they get to red exp.

[Chubby]

after 4 years in the league:

Kennedy is up to 88/88
Wilcox is up to 77/77
Wiebe is 29/33 (he never plays since I have stud DEs)

[gstelmack]

I've got 2 players I'm keeping my eye on in my upcoming office league draft. Both are WAY down the draft list (in the high-100s / low-200s), both have orange bars jammed pretty far over to the right, both have decent combine scores, and both are Very Underrated.

I'm curious about the combo of decent combine scores and high bars leading to a poor draft grade (maybe my scout sucks that bad), but how with orange bars jammed way to the right (most around the 3/4 mark or higher) they are still Very Underrated.

These guys are likely to be my first and second round picks just to see how they turn out. Both are at positions of need.

[MalcPow]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

I've got 2 players I'm keeping my eye on in my upcoming office league draft. Both are WAY down the draft list (in the high-100s / low-200s), both have orange bars jammed pretty far over to the right, both have decent combine scores, and both are Very Underrated.

I'm curious about the combo of decent combine scores and high bars leading to a poor draft grade (maybe my scout sucks that bad), but how with orange bars jammed way to the right (most around the 3/4 mark or higher) they are still Very Underrated.

These guys are likely to be my first and second round picks just to see how they turn out. Both are at positions of need.

Just to confuse things (and make you think twice), I took the same approach in a recent SP draft. The WR I drafted late in the first went from a 40/74 pre-camp to a 40/68, and the DE I took in the 2nd went from a 25/56 to a 26/51. Both were guys with great orange bars and 'very underrated,' but they were also players that I was reaching for based on both of those things. The WR in particular was also very underwhelming on the field. I'm still seeing good results from guys with solid orange bars that are very underrated though, at least in terms of my scout's rating of them growing over time. But the great bars and very underrated guys might be a little questionable from what I'm seeing.

[MrBigglesworth]

Originally Posted by MalcPow

Just to confuse things (and make you think twice), I took the same approach in a recent SP draft. The WR I drafted late in the first went from a 40/74 pre-camp to a 40/68, and the DE I took in the 2nd went from a 25/56 to a 26/51. Both were guys with great orange bars and 'very underrated,' but they were also players that I was reaching for based on both of those things. The WR in particular was also very underwhelming on the field. I'm still seeing good results from guys with solid orange bars that are very underrated though, at least in terms of my scout's rating of them growing over time. But the great bars and very underrated guys might be a little questionable from what I'm seeing.

How was your scout at those positions? Possible that he was just wrong.

[MalcPow]

Originally Posted by MrBigglesworth

How was your scout at those positions? Possible that he was just wrong.

For what it's worth he was Good with Young Talent, Very Good with WRs, and Good with DLs. I think what I was trying to get to was that it's possible that a guy with fantastic orange bars that's also listed as very underrated might be a sign that your scout has flubbed this one. In the case of the WR, for example, the orange bars were nearly pinned to the right, or in the 80-90 range, in all but the return categories. If we're working from the assumption that over/under rated now means in relation to the bars as opposed to the draft rating, then it's nearly impossible for a guy with those bars to be 'very underrated.' I don't have a large sample size at this point, just saying that's a warning sign I'm watching.

[DeltaWhiskey]

[quote=MalcPow;1459637]Yeah it's looking like the post-interview orange bars are a clarification of your scout's initial rating of the player, and the over/under-rated tag is an assessment of whether or not the player might be better or worse than that. Conceptually it doesn't make much sense, but I think Jim was looking for some mechanism to make the interviews more worthwhile.

I haven't actually worked through this yet, but conceptually it may make sense in the following manner. If the orange bars represent your scouts assessment of the player based on all the data he has available, could the over/under assessment represent your entire staffs assessment? If this is the case, this adds an additional element of realism to the game, as the interview process in the NFL is typically conducted by the coaching staff, GM, scouts, etc. Therefore, the over/under would represent the impression provided by a wider range of individuals within the organization (?).

[Ben E Lou]

I'm getting the impression that it's simpler (and more sensible). It looks like the initial bars are very similar for every team (if not identical), but it has been shown that OR/UR varies from scout to scout. Maybe it would be easier to think of it thusly:

Initial Bars: overall skill-by-skill assessment of all of the scouts in the league
Overrated/Underrated: YOUR scout's impression of whether or not he's better or worse than the consensus regarding his bars

[gstelmack]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I'm getting the impression that it's simpler (and more sensible). It looks like the initial bars are very similar for every team (if not identical), but it has been shown that OR/UR varies from scout to scout. Maybe it would be easier to think of it thusly:

Initial Bars: overall skill-by-skill assessment of all of the scouts in the league
Overrated/Underrated: YOUR scout's impression of whether or not he's better or worse than the consensus regarding his bars

When I get back to work on Tuesday, I need to post some screenshots of one of the players I have there. The guy had decent orange bars, rated near the top of the draft, my scout says is Underrated, but he drafts as a 37 future? Now, post-TC he may be a lot better, and I'm waiting to see that, but I'm not sure how a 37-future guy is anywhere near the upper echelons (1st or 2nd round pick) of the draft. And I think this single fact is what is throwing me for a loop in 2k7 drafts...

(and now on Tuesday we'll find out how well I remember this guy, and see if I'm screwing up any of the details)

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by gstelmack

When I get back to work on Tuesday, I need to post some screenshots of one of the players I have there. The guy had decent orange bars, rated near the top of the draft, my scout says is Underrated, but he drafts as a 37 future? Now, post-TC he may be a lot better, and I'm waiting to see that, but I'm not sure how a 37-future guy is anywhere near the upper echelons (1st or 2nd round pick) of the draft. And I think this single fact is what is throwing me for a loop in 2k7 drafts...

(and now on Tuesday we'll find out how well I remember this guy, and see if I'm screwing up any of the details)

He would have been "overrated" in pre-E , but now he's overrated in E since he's better than 37. He'll prob end up at like 49/49 once he finishes developing.

[FBPro]

Originally Posted by MizzouRah

The funny thing for me is, I keep forgetting to interview players as I hit the last FA stage without thinking and even thought I draft high on the board players, they usually are not very good whatsoever. I'm a dumb ass.

I really wish there were 3 pop ups in the game.

Are you sure you want to proceed?

1. You can't change a player's weight after continuing.
2. You can't send someone to the summer league after continuing.
3. You can't interview draftees after continuing.

WOW, so do I. I usually only remember the draft interview/scout thing. Others I always forget.

[tarcone]

Originally Posted by SkyDog

I'm getting the impression that it's simpler (and more sensible). It looks like the initial bars are very similar for every team (if not identical), but it has been shown that OR/UR varies from scout to scout. Maybe it would be easier to think of it thusly:

Initial Bars: overall skill-by-skill assessment of all of the scouts in the league
Overrated/Underrated: YOUR scout's impression of whether or not he's better or worse than the consensus regarding his bars

I like this one.
If his blue bars are at 50 and you interveiw, he comes in at an 80. Youre scout says very underrated. So I guess you better trust your scout or get to know him.

[Chubby]

Originally Posted by tarcone

I like this one.
If his blue bars are at 50 and you interveiw, he comes in at an 80. Youre scout says very underrated. So I guess you better trust your scout or get to know him.

Kind of but not really.

He is revealed as a 50 after drafted, once he hits 50/50 he goes up to be rated 80/80, your scout said Very Underrated.

[Sgran]

If you fire a scout and replace him with someone better, the new scout is told by the scout guild to mess with your picks and everything he tells you is wrong.

[Hammer]

I think the draft is spot on now. Best part of the game for me. Maybe its actually too predictable and easy to work players out now, compared with real life. However, from a gaming standpoint its excellent. It helps those weaker teams have that much more advantage if they draft early.

Having so many different player variables to piece together makes draft time the best part of the game for me. Always fun guessing what the opposition are going to do in multiplayer.