FOF7 - Player Development/Scouting Thread

[Ben E Lou]

It's different. We can use this thread to discuss. First example of "different" would be my TE in my dynasty thread, Jamie Mathis.

WHEN DRAFTED
Rnd 3 - Jamie Mathis, TE, Louisiana State--22/52..i don't hvae terribly high hopes for him

END FIRST PRESEASON
Mathis, Jamie 89 TE 1 28 44 4 yrs

END SECOND PRESEASON
Mathis, Jamie 89 TE 2 41 48 3 yrs

BEGIN THIRD SEASON
He's now showing 47/47. All of that was through my team having the same staff.


Here's what the independent scouts said about him:

[QuikSand]

The big movement there rating by rating is a little puzzling... but I think I need to shake the "realism" hangup in my thinking. Okay, fine, the guy's PB rating is bouncing from the 70s to the 40s and back...forget what that even stands for, just think about what that means for a young player's development, scouting error, and general uncertainty in the game.

[Ben E Lou]

I've never looked at rating-by-rating movement, so I have no comment on whether there's much of a change there. For me the big change here is the movement from "possible solid starter" to "replacement-level backup" to "decent starter." I realize I'm dealing with a sample size of one here and that there are likely other dev paths, but I rather like the idea of a guy being scouted above his true potential, then below, then eventually zeroing in on it. If there are a significant number of guys like this, I would think we'd find ourselves giving guys playing time to see how they develop rather than dumping them or marking them as "do not cut" after the very first TC. That feels more right.

[QuikSand]

If it works out that way (takes time to see what's really gong on) then yes yes.

[zbuckley]

:popcorn:

[Carman Bulldog]

What kind of playing time did he get those seasons? Could that have had an impact on the independent scout?

[Pyser]

ive played VERY little but was immediately struck by the big numbers seemingly marginal players put up. which would be great, if not every 30s player sucked and every 80s player was amazing

of course, what's the point of ratings then anyway, but i may be getting ahead of myself

[beorn]

Question:

In Out of the Park Baseball, actual playing time has zero effect on scouting accuracy. It seems like it should, but it doesn't. The passage of time (repeated scoutings) does, and being in the majors does. But innings played, no.

Is it established fact in FOF that playing time actually increases scouting accuracy?

[sidthelid]

Ok stupid question, but where is this screen, I have hit "yes" for scouting ratings when starting a new career and I am at the TC stage but can i find it.

Thanks

[MalcPow]

Click on the bars section of a player card.

[sidthelid]

Click on the bars section of a player card.

Thank you

[zbuckley]

I've played the game for about an hour so I could be off on this but here's my initial take.

No static bars really changes the game on drafting. I think some FOFers could sleepwalk thru a draft but that's certainly changed. I feel like Jim has added more noise surrounding player development and there's probably a nugget here or there but I think it's mostly white noise.

I think there's less scouting error in relation to pre combine bars but I got nothing to back that up.

I wonder if basically every year a players abilities are being re-rolled. I should say I think what we see is being re-rolled based on the underlying ability. I'm guessing that doesn't change but just like a player could reproduce new combine #s every year I'm guessing it's a similar process going on just with all the players abilities throughout his career.

[gstelmack]

Are the numbers in the screenshot current or future?

[Ben E Lou]

Are the numbers in the screenshot current or future?Future potential.

[Ben E Lou]

Is it established fact in FOF that playing time actually increases scouting accuracy?Pretty much absolutely in older versions, and it sure looks like that in this version.

[dubb93]

I wish scouting history would tell me what my scout thinks of him, since that is what is important to me. All of the independent numbers are different from my numbers, some by a wide margin. I don't mind seeing that number, but I would rather my numbers get tracked so I have something I can better go by. The independent numbers seem to be swinging wildly season to season, especially for young guys.

[BighouseBrock]

I wish scouting history would tell me what my scout thinks of him, since that is what is important to me. All of the independent numbers are different from my numbers, some by a wide margin. I don't mind seeing that number, but I would rather my numbers get tracked so I have something I can better go by. The independent numbers seem to be swinging wildly season to season, especially for young guys.


agreed, would like to see this too. also would be nice to have the original combines kept on player card as well.

as far as the independent scouts, why would it be just one, seems like it would have been far more accurate to get an avg scout rating from a group of scouts.

[beorn]

Pretty much absolutely in older versions, and it sure looks like that in this version. Thanks!

[beorn]

Future potential.This may be ignorance on my part, since I have little experience with FOF, but I know quite a bit about the parallel mechanism in OOTP.

If it is potential that is jumping around, here's what I think would explain what's happening:

A young player has a given potential rating. (It might well rise or fall in reality, at least in OOTP, but let's say it stays constant for the first few years of a player's career.) The game needs a mechanism for creating the "fog of war."

In OOTP, if a scout's initial rating is 10 points too high, then the game remembers that, and the next time the scout rates the player, odds are very high that the scout's rating will inch in the correct direction, but not too much at once. It's as though the scout has a huge ego, and is only willing to grudgingly admit to his mistake. (You have to use the highly granular 1-100 rating system to see this, and, as a GM, you can fail to recognize this pattern because of the noise created by players whose potential really does change.)

But if you are observing potential ratings in FOF7 jumping all over the place, chances are that this game uses a contrasting process. A scout's rating being 10 points too high the first time does not mean that the scout will probably err on the high side again. He doesn't "remember" last time and just makes a fresh estimate, with an equal chance of being too high or too low. It's as though the scout has no ego whatsoever... Actual potential does not change, but the estimates can be jarringly different.

[dzilla77]

One thing to note in the screen shot - the scout was different in 2014 and 2015. I think that plays into some of the movement between the two years.

[zbuckley]

LOL that this guy went undrafted but I thought he'd be an interesting one to follow.

<img src="https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1k4y8EUkxfGl_gIhCJuYa60YMM_tMOyub21vrAIhlVYY/pub?w=960&amp;h=720">

I was curious what the cut test would look like on him.

<img src="https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/15AKmFbwskCxMLJeEEo8La-Z0oo_VE9-wZEzqDFmT__g/pub?w=960&amp;h=720">

So after week 1 cut test

<img src="https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1vSWaFCU6BDoSTsEl6I8U3WOyPVZE6Bs7F12icTowRxM/pub?w=960&amp;h=720">

After 4 years in the league

<img src="https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1Fn1H0dJc5d-qoST9O2K-gCoxo6NP47mkUA557WOeYqo/pub?w=960&amp;h=720">

[zbuckley]

It's interesting how much the players ratings change over the first two seasons. I don't think much has changed with player development. I don't think it will be hard to identify major creepers, there will be some middle of the road combine guys that will be hard to identify which direction they're going.

[beeznik]

Huge new dynamic in this game. You can no longer get rid of a guy after one TC. I like it.

[Ben E Lou]

It's interesting how much the players ratings change over the first two seasons. I don't think much has changed with player development. I don't think it will be hard to identify major creepers, there will be some middle of the road combine guys that will be hard to identify which direction they're going.What did his stats look like? I ask because I've seen a guy like this who never really panned out in terms of performance.

[beorn]

Could someone explain the meaning of
* cut test
* TC
* creeper (just a guess, this refers to players whose potential gradually rises, but want to be sure)

Thanks!

[zbuckley]

Pretty solid considering I was only simulating the entire season and not messing with any game planning stuff.
<img src="https://docs.google.com/drawings/d/1ouO8v-d9QyYeOsSnA6fK6XxgFX7wYLDjzLO2PZdxGUw/pub?w=960&amp;h=720">

[zbuckley]

Could someone explain the meaning of
* cut test
* TC
* creeper (just a guess, this refers to players whose potential gradually rises, but want to be sure)

Thanks!

In prior versions once a player was under contract on your roster and you cut him into the free agency pool his ratings could either go up or down. If his ratings went up, it generally indicated his ratings would continue to climb.

TC just stand for training camp.

you're right on your guess.

[gstelmack]

Future potential.

Does anything also track the progress of his "current" bars?

[Ben E Lou]

Does anything also track the progress of his "current" bars?
The export does.

[beorn]

In prior versions once a player was under contract on your roster and you cut him into the free agency pool his ratings could either go up or down. If his ratings went up, it generally indicated his ratings would continue to climb.

TC just stand for training camp.

you're right on your guess.Thanks!

[gmoses]

I went ahead and quick simmed to 2030 and then checked to see how many undrafted players were playing. There were less then 10 listed as starters and none of better then average quality. I also don't see much in the way of late round guys becoming really good players.

This was with injuries and combine accuracy at default levels. I'm wondering if I should set combine accuracy lower or if perhaps the default injury settings keeps late bloomers from ever getting on the field.

Any experience in adjusting these?

Has anyone seen any top players come out of the late rounds or undrafted?

[QuikSand]

Huge new dynamic in this game. You can no longer get rid of a guy after one TC. I like it.

I still don't have a complete feel for all this, but it sure does seem like young player development is more complex and requires more patience and risk-taking. Good developments, agreed.

[Honolulu Blue]

I went ahead and quick simmed to 2030 and then checked to see how many undrafted players were playing. There were less then 10 listed as starters and none of better then average quality. I also don't see much in the way of late round guys becoming really good players.

This was with injuries and combine accuracy at default levels. I'm wondering if I should set combine accuracy lower or if perhaps the default injury settings keeps late bloomers from ever getting on the field.

Any experience in adjusting these?

Has anyone seen any top players come out of the late rounds or undrafted?

I set injuries to 200 and combine accuracy to 0 in my current career. Looking over the guys on the last season's (2023) All-League teams that were picked past the 2nd round (besides kickers)...

* 1st team CB drafted 3(8). Rated 52/52; doesn't look elite, but had a lucky year with 9 picks.

* 2nd team WR drafted 7(21). Rated 64/64. Looks pretty good. 100+ catches each of the last 3 seasons, 80-90 catches the three years before that. This year is his first All-League mention.

* 2nd team T drafted 3(13). Rated 53/53. Ratings good, not great; visible stats the same. I'm not sure why he was picked - desperation?

* 2nd team CB drafted 4(10). Rated 72/72. Looks legit to me.

* 2nd team S drafted 5(1), Rated 83/83. Had a crazy number of tackles despite missing 2 games.

I haven't checked the other years, in part because many of them would be filled with current players. None of the guys listed above are current NFL players.

Overall I'm impressed with how many lower draft picks are making an impact in my league. Your mileage may vary.

[AlexB]

One thing to note in the screen shot - the scout was different in 2014 and 2015. I think that plays into some of the movement between the two years.

To add to this, I only realised yesterday that if you click on the scouts's name on the tracking screen you can see his bars. You can then judge how much faith you put in his assessment.

[QuikSand]

Another interesting case study from my solo career:

http://www.sevenshuffles.com/QuikSand/dtratingsmovement.jpg

I don't understand if this is an attempt to model something we see in real life... but look at this guy's PR Tech rating. He's been bouncing back and forth between "pretty solid" and "elite" for his entire career. Sadly, the stats aren't deep enough to really measure much, but here are his sack/PR% totals for the last few years (as a starter), alongside his scouted PR Tech.

2034: PRT 95, 6.0 sacks, 3.8 PR%
2035: PRT 59, 7.5 sacks, 7.3 PR%
2036: PRT 90, 4.0 sacks, 4.7 PR%

So, obviously a tiny sample size, but -- you can't find anything to support that this guy really got worse in 2035 like the scout rating suggests he did. In fact, that was the year he posted his best pass rush stats.

I'm definitely not ready to conclude anything from this, but it's got me thinking. Maybe the scouted ratings are somehow affected by the last full season? (like contract demands seem to be) And this is one of the things that gets updated during preseason week 2? That could help explain the ratings jump from '35 to '36 (though not the stats dropoff that followed).

[path12]

Could it also be a difference in the quality of the scout hired to do the league that year? When I click on the scout name I get his bars and they do vary.

[flounder]

Yeah. I had some players' stat histories go wonky and the scout had changed to someone with a low scouting bar.

[Julio Riddols]

I like that there seem to be guys who are pretty steady in their ratings. Its like the scouts all kind of agree on him, while other players flip around all over the place. My main man Brent Roberson for example:

http://i.imgur.com/DHJvnHd.png

And those scouts range from craptastic to amazing. Interesting enough his volatility is 90, so I would have expected more variation from him.

[Julio Riddols]

This isn't related, but it seems like some conflicts and affinities only appear over time. I have a pair of safeties who have been on the team for 3 years together, but I think the conflict only showed up last season.

[flounder]

That might explain what just happened to me. I signed a guy to become my receivers leader and even though the stars were aligned, he didn't have an affinity with my QB.

[Hammer]

Is doing the cut test a useful commodity in any shape or form in this version?

[gtmarc]

Can someone post links to articles about either the new or even the old player development? Its been awhile since I played FOF, and I vaguely remember sucking ratings out of the game and spreadsheets with pivot tables .... but I don't remember the nuts and bolts of what I was looking for in those number. Some very specific things if I remember correct. So, an article that sums up the new system would be wonderful. Did Solesismic publish anything at all about this new system? And even an old article on the old system would help as a refresher on what I used to look at.

[aston217]

gtmarc, you're thinking of changetracker. You can now use PlayerTracker (see FOF7 Reference Thread - Front Office Football Central (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showthread.php?t=88552)) if you want to track ratings, or click on player bars in game (which shows league scout only, not your own scout). I'd argue it's less meaningful now. FOF6.4 was very specific, you're right. Players' ratings, if they were significantly masked, would slowly move in the RIGHT direction over their careers. And their rookie camp gave a huge hint for both what that direction was, and how much they were going to move in it. The new system is much closer to what's being described in this thread. As I understand it, player ratings jump around a lot early on, but then start to settle fairly quickly so you aren't poring over spreadsheets to unlock "secrets." But, scout variation is also much increased. So the "fog of war" is there now, in a way it wasn't really before.

@Hammer, I don't know what to make of the changing rating numbers anymore. But I find cutting someone and attempting to resign them again potentially telling in a small way. Guys I'm expecting to be good who are willing to resign...I feel that tells me they aren't all that. They might be useful, still, or maybe not. Guys who get past injustices...might not be stars and might not be useful, but I feel only guys who end up fairly solid OVR will be this way. Probably not a 30/30 guy, for example. And most times I'm OK with keeping a player above that somewhere on the 53.

@flounder, the sum of their personality scores was probably insufficient. If a guy is about to become a leader, the game will report affinities and conflicts you are about to acquire (but only if there are any).

(Wow, old timestamps on those last two. Hope it's still applicable.)

[gtmarc]

Ok, I'd already found Player Tracker. What I'm trying to remember is what I used to look for among those numbers. And so far, there's precious little described in this thread. just a few anecdotes about a small sample size of just a few players. It does help a bit to learn that its not as mechanically, brain-dead simple (if you knew the arcane secrets of what to look for) as the game for the previous versions. That's good to hear. Thanks.

Solesismic didn't write anything to describe the new system to players???????
(now unemployed software product manager shaking his head) :eek: :)

[Nemesis]

Ok, I'd already found Player Tracker. What I'm trying to remember is what I used to look for among those numbers. And so far, there's precious little described in this thread. just a few anecdotes about a small sample size of just a few players. It does help a bit to learn that its not as mechanically, brain-dead simple (if you knew the arcane secrets of what to look for) as the game for the previous versions. That's good to hear. Thanks.

Solesismic didn't write anything to describe the new system to players???????
(now unemployed software product manager shaking his head) :eek: :)

The old system had a "tell" about where a player would end up. The new system doesn't and I'm sure quite a few people prefer the unpredictable system.

EDIT: And to be clear, after preseason game 2, you'll have a solid understanding as to what type of player you may have.