More on Mentors

[SCJenkins81]

Skydog I know you did a good bit of research on this - I did some testing of my own, and I believe that mentors have no impact on a young player's development, but rather, they have their impact on the young player's performance.

So a rookie who is a 30 will play over his head when a mentor is at his position, but he won't progress any faster or further that a rookie who is a 30 who doesn't have a mentor. Is this basically what you guys are seeing as well?

Thanks
Johnny

[Ben E Lou]

Examples?

[SCJenkins81]

Here's what I did. I started a game as St. Louis. Their starting right DT is Jimmy Kennedy, a rookie out of Penn St. As the game starts there are no mentors for the DTs for St. Louis. I simmed this first season five times, and Kennedy progressed from a 32 to a 39 three times, and the other two times, from a 32 to a 40. Pretty consistent there.

Then I started a game as St. Louis again, this time trading for John Randle, a 15 year veteran and mentor to DTs. I had him start alongside Kennedy at left DT. Again I simmed the first season five times, and Kennedy progressed from a 32 to a 40 all five times.

So it seems to me that there is very very little, but probably no, correlation between mentors and progression. I think it just has an impact on performance. Skydog is that what you think?

[Ben E Lou]

I haven't studied that portion of it carefully enough to know.

What was the difference in performance between the mentor seasons and the non-mentor seasons?

[Celeval]

Hm... open question, could mentors help development for non-playing rookies? Have you tried simming with/without mentor for Kennedy if he was not starting?

[SCJenkins81]

Skydog - give me a minute, I'll look at that - that would be interesting to find out. The stats for mentored rookies should, I think be better than the stats for non-mentored rookies, but I could be wrong.

Celeval - also a good question. I'm going to get on that one too. Check back in a few.

-Johnny

[GabeRivers]

Good analysis, SCJenkins81. Your conclusion seems logical and may indeed be accurate.

However, one might also interpret your test to suggest that having a mentor will tend to result in an approximate 2% gain in development rate (an extra 1/32 three out of 5 times).

This may seem small, but I'm left wondering if anything much larger than that might result in game imbalance issues that Jim wanted to avoid.

Just a thought. Again, good work.

[Samdari]

Originally posted by GabeRivers
However, one might also interpret your test to suggest that having a mentor will tend to result in an approximate 2% gain in development rate (an extra 1/32 three out of 5 times)

He's got WAY too small a sample size to draw that conclusion.

[SCJenkins81]

I think my original research was flawed. Let me explain. Kennedy was starting next to John Randle, who was a 75. That had to have taken away some of Kennedy's tackles and sacks. I shouldn't have compared Kennedy starting next to Randle with Kennedy starting next to some shmoe. With Kennedy starting next to a shmoe, he had to assume the role as top DT and was counted on to make the plays and the sacks, etc. With Kennedy starting next to a 75, he had some of his sacks and tackles taken away. With these diminished stats, that may have impeded his development and progression as far as ratings are concerned. At least that's what I'm thinking.

So here is a better way to figure this out. I will sim 5 1st seasons with Bulger starting at QB with Rodey Peete as his backup and mentor. Then I will sim 5 1st seasons with Bulger starting at QB with a non-mentor as his backup. Then I will compare not only progression but also stats. I should have that shortly.

[SCJenkins81]

This is probably too small a sample size, but I have limited time right now. I'll go more in depth later today.

QB Bulger
with mentor averaged over 3 1st seasons
4,035 yds
24 TDs
21 INTs
61% comp

without mentor averaged over 3 1st seasons
3, 804 yds
27 TDs
19 INTs
59% comp

Progressions were averaging about from 27 to 40 each.

Johnny

[Samdari]

Originally posted by SCJenkins81
So here is a better way to figure this out. I will sim 5 1st seasons with Bulger starting at QB with Rodey Peete as his backup and mentor. Then I will sim 5 1st seasons with Bulger starting at QB with a non-mentor as his backup. Then I will compare not only progression but also stats. I should have that shortly.

I also think this would be a good idea to do at other positions, as I think QBs are in a world of their own, when it comes to things like development. Another variable to consider is if QBs develop based totally on # of plays, or is passing more makes them develop quicker.

[TroyF]

Some quick thoughts in no particular order:

1) Players develop over time, not just over a season. I'm wondering what the ratings increase are in the next training camp or maybe after two or three years with a mentor as opposed to having zero years with a mentor. Maybe the impact of a mentor or mentors isn't felt for a year or two down the road.

2) I think you have to make sure you are getting a player on the "upside" as opposed to the other way.We've already discussed this with draft threads, but the development of a younger player rarely goes down/down/down/up or down/up/down/up. It may start with a 1 or 2 point +/- after the draft and then take 5 years for a complete breakout or bust, but you can tell who is on the upswing. If Kennedy is one of the "down" guys it could be argued that his menor was helping him stay at the current level.

3) We all know playing time is the biggest key to a rookie growing. Maybe a mentor will help a non playing rookie more. I think someone else made this point above.

[balaka4]

This is uncomfirmed with test results, just my observations from playing the game. I'm somewhere in year 203x. I didn't give much thought to mentors for the first 25 years. Many times I would draft a player who showed high potential (70s and up) and would end up frustrated that in the years after I drafted him that potential would drop. While this is not the case for all my top rookies that I drafted, just enough to make me frustrated. I started signing mentors to my teams with players with high potential and for the most part, I've seen less of a slip in potential for those players. Just an observation I've seen, nothing more.

[QuikSand]

Excellent points, Troy.