Useful weights for Draft Analyzer

[QuikSand]

I have tried a few times to enter "weights" into the Draft Analyzer tool, but I confess that I have not come anywhere near getting much of anything really useful out of doing so.

I can look over a FOF and very quickly come away with a sense of who my top 5 picks (or whatever) look like - just whom I'd rate as the very top prospects, if I had a pick to get them. I usually can't even get DA to agree with me there.

I know that I am more reliant on chemistry than most anyone, but even when setting that stuff off I'm still not getting the DA-generated lists to align well at all with my own thinking.

I feel like all the tools are there, for the most part. But I haven't cracked the code, for whatever reason.


I know this has been a tight-lipped topic, to some degree. Fine. If you invested a ton of time and have razor-sharp weights that make a killing, don't share all that. But is anyone game to share thoughts about some of the overall principles involved?

-weighting combines versus bars in FOF8

-how to weight static vs non-static bars/ratings

-how to get combine skippers to rate in reasonably

-how much to penalize for missing constraints in FOF8

Anyone out there game to talk about this stuff?

[Ben E Lou]

See responses below. Overall, I'm not using DA as my primary tool any more. I've got something customized, but a significant part of it works quite similarly to DA. (There are weights for every bar and combine, in other words.) So much of this applies to what I've experienced, I think. Plus I still use DA as a secondary lookup for players where I'm unsure.I have tried a few times to enter "weights" into the Draft Analyzer tool, but I confess that I have not come anywhere near getting much of anything really useful out of doing so.

I can look over a FOF and very quickly come away with a sense of who my top 5 picks (or whatever) look like - just whom I'd rate as the very top prospects, if I had a pick to get them. I usually can't even get DA to agree with me there.

I know that I am more reliant on chemistry than most anyone, but even when setting that stuff off I'm still not getting the DA-generated lists to align well at all with my own thinking.

I feel like all the tools are there, for the most part. But I haven't cracked the code, for whatever reason.


I know this has been a tight-lipped topic, to some degree. Fine. If you invested a ton of time and have razor-sharp weights that make a killing, don't share all that. But is anyone game to share thoughts about some of the overall principles involved?

-weighting combines versus bars in FOF8 Very close, with perhaps a slight lean towards bars.

-how to weight static vs non-static bars/ratings It depends on the position. I've seen too many linemen who look like this (http://gml.fof-belco.com/playercard.php?playerid=22590) to weight blocking strength all that highly, but for some other positions, the static bars are really important. But beyond the "might this guy go +15" factor, it also comes down to how important I believe that bar to be in the play resolution engine. In other words, an uber-high Sense Rush bar is FAR less of an indicator of a good QB than it used to be, and there's a good chance that a guy who has one isn't going to increase in ratings. However, having a good Sense Rush bar is still a good way to reduce sack-fumble-defensive-touchdown plays, so it's still important to me. But in many ways, I'm just treating it like hole recognition, route running, etc.

-how to get combine skippers to rate in reasonably It's not perfect, but making the bar weight on combine skippers equal to the bar/combine sum for players who have them helps with that. But frankly, in the system I use I exclude them entirely, then just view the ones who look interesting one-by-one and stick them into my list roughly where I think they belong. My take is that there just aren't enough of them to try to tweak the system just to make them show up in the "right" place.

-how much to penalize for missing constraints in FOF8 Much less than previous versions. In FOF8, roughly 25% of 50+ players, 20% of 55+ players, and even 15% of 60+ players are misses on at least one constraint. Further, a *lot* more players (more than double, I think) are within the constraints, so it's no longer a case of just grabbing a constraints guy in the 7th round and there being a 25% or better chance that he's a starter-quality guy.

In short, there are quite a bit more constraint-missers who are starters, and quite a bit more constraint-hitters who are teh suk--enough of both that while I pay attention to them, they're not a major factor.

Anyone out there game to talk about this stuff?

[Ushikawa]

Beyond these notes I think the correlation coefficients have dramatically changed especially regarding SOL for RBs and WRs, AGI-RunD and 40-PRT for front 7 (mild hypothesis that it is mass relative)

All endurance masked pairs seem irrelevant as well and endurance is way more important IMP in 8.

Would love to hear from others about all this...

[Mobarak]

See responses below. Overall, I'm not using DA as my primary tool any more. I've got something customized, but a significant part of it works quite similarly to DA. (There are weights for every bar and combine, in other words.) So much of this applies to what I've experienced, I think. Plus I still use DA as a secondary lookup for players where I'm unsure.


Using tools to a game that others don't have access to kind of stinks, I hope I'm reading wrong what you are saying. You aren't really saying you have a program similar to DA that "you" use right?

[garion333]

Using tools to a game that others don't have access to kind of stinks, I hope I'm reading wrong what you are saying. You aren't really saying you have a program similar to DA that "you" use right?

He is saying he's written his own tool and is using it. Ben's probably running a script through Excel that points out the stuff he's looking for.

What's the problem there?

Stelmack's stuff is all stuff he's created on his own.

You're free to do the same.

[Mobarak]

He is saying he's written his own tool and is using it. Ben's probably running a script through Excel that points out the stuff he's looking for.

What's the problem there?

Stelmack's stuff is all stuff he's created on his own.

You're free to do the same.


I don't know how to write scripts in Excel, does everyone else who plays this game? There is nothing wrong with it, I just seems like a bad idea in a game that's on the verge of being discontinued. I certainly know now there must be a treasure trove of information, strategies and programs not being shared. What a sad day.

[Mobarak]

I don't know how to write scripts in Excel, does everyone else who plays this game? There is nothing wrong with it, I just seems like a bad idea in a game that's on the verge of being discontinued. I certainly know now there must be a treasure trove of information, strategies and programs not being shared. What a sad day.

I guess I came from a competitive background where I would want everyone to have all the information and every tool available. I would want to compete on only the highest level with only the most competent of players to see if I really can be the best. I get no gratification from winning because my opponent was handicapped even to the smallest degree.

[johnnyshaka]

I guess I came from a competitive background where I would want everyone to have all the information and every tool available. I would want to compete on only the highest level with only the most competent of players to see if I really can be the best. I get no gratification from winning because my opponent was handicapped even to the smallest degree.

If you came from a competitive background then you'd find a way to "one up" the competition.

Whining about the competition when they've put the time and effort in to try and find an edge seems like the exact opposite reaction somebody from a "competitive background" would have.

[Julio Riddols]

Beating Ben in FOF has always been something you have to earn. Dude is putting in the work. Gotta respect the grind.

[cleancoder42]

I don't know how to write scripts in Excel, does everyone else who plays this game? There is nothing wrong with it, I just seems like a bad idea in a game that's on the verge of being discontinued. I certainly know now there must be a treasure trove of information, strategies and programs not being shared. What a sad day.

I write my own tools to analyze the draft, analyze free agents, parse the logs, etc. I know how to write software, so i do. Are you saying I shouldn't? That's crazy to me.

[QuikSand]

Beating Ben in FOF has always been something you have to earn. Dude is putting in the work. Gotta respect the grind.

He's also a smart S.O.B. and has a memory like a damned bear trap. #respect

Whether he does things by counting on his fingers and toes, scribbling in a notepad, or developing an app to help with his own calculations... I don't see the real difference.

[zsteelers]

I write my own tools to analyze the draft, analyze free agents, parse the logs, etc. I know how to write software, so i do. Are you saying I shouldn't? That's crazy to me.

ditto.

[Mobarak]

No I've just come from games were third party programs and scripts not approved by the Dev or community aren't allowed unless available to everyone. This would be the first game I've come across where that isn't considered cheating. I'm pretty sure that's the norm, but not the case in this game. It fine, I learned what I needed to from this.

[garion333]

The only time I've ever come across issues like you're talking about is live mp games like first person shooters or Madden. In a text based aim where people aren't going head to head you are free to do whatever you want to decipher stats or whatever.

I'm not sure what games and communities you've been a part of but my experience with FOF and OOTP in mp are consistent in that you're allowed to create whatever you want and it isn't considered cheating. Now if you somehow hack the game and, say, boost your player's ratings then yes that's cheating. But pulling the combines of the draftees into Excel and sorting them is hardly cheating.

[Julio Riddols]

He's also a smart S.O.B. and has a memory like a damned bear trap. #respect

Whether he does things by counting on his fingers and toes, scribbling in a notepad, or developing an app to help with his own calculations... I don't see the real difference.

True, some just have a technique that works, by hook or by crook. I'm gonna have to get back in the IHOF and take the challenge again one of these days.

That's still where the men and boys are separated isn't it? It's been a while.

[Mobarak]

The only time I've ever come across issues like you're talking about is live mp games like first person shooters or Madden. In a text based aim where people aren't going head to head you are free to do whatever you want to decipher stats or whatever.

I'm not sure what games and communities you've been a part of but my experience with FOF and OOTP in mp are consistent in that you're allowed to create whatever you want and it isn't considered cheating. Now if you somehow hack the game and, say, boost your player's ratings then yes that's cheating. But pulling the combines of the draftees into Excel and sorting them is hardly cheating.



True enough, who is on duty to make sure those kinds of scripts aren't being used? I assumed the programs that were available in that bundle that someone put out with DA player tracker etc were the approved programs to be used. I can see now about half the people are running their own stuff. I can also see why there are only a a dozen or so actual leagues left, the player pool was withered down to the die-hards, the coders and the occasional new player. I think I mentioned before this game should have come bundled with a copy of excel.

[Hammer]

I have always leaned towards your way of thinking Mobarak. It really shouldn't turn into a maths or IT exercise. The game suffers for it in my honest opinion, the more its inner workings are exposed.

On the plus side Ben and the other guys involved do share most of their work, by and large. Also I don't use anything out of the game at all, and remain competitive (I play in the CFL with you, Grave Digger). Some people enjoy breaking the game down, to some winning is important enough to justify it. I think we have to live and let live. It is not so much of an advantage that you can't compete with these guys. I was initially upset like you as I thought I would be forced to go this route to remain competive, but it really isn't the case.

[cleancoder42]

I assumed the programs that were available in that bundle that someone put out with DA player tracker etc were the approved programs to be used.

DA isn't approved by anyone. It's just a tool written by a player, gstelmack, who decided to release it to the public.

To be honest, the main reason that I don't release any of my tools is that they are crude. I develop them just enough to be useful to me, but they are certainly not polished.

Also, he supports those programs, which takes time. Sometimes alot of time, which is great for him, but not something I really want to do right now.

[corbes]

Just to be clear, there's not a thing that utilities or spreadsheets do that you can't see with your own eyes and a copy of FOF.

[corbes]

Also, a relevant data point: some people have been playing this game for 18 years. It's that experience that tells them what to look for, not the utilities.

[cleancoder42]

Also, (or Dola as the kids say)
You're playing a text-based sports sim, and are surprised that there are players playing it, who like analyzing stats? That's pretty much this game's target market.

[Mobarak]

Just to be clear, there's not a thing that utilities or spreadsheets do that you can't see with your own eyes and a copy of FOF.


Yes. You, I and everyone else has been doing that since we bought the game I imagine.

[Ben E Lou]

Heh. Busy couple of days, and lots to respond to here. I'll just pick out the highlights for now.


Whining about the competition when they've put the time and effort in to try and find an edge seems like the exact opposite reaction somebody from a "competitive background" would have.:withstupid:

I write my own tools to analyze the draft, analyze free agents, parse the logs, etc. I know how to write software, so i do. Are you saying I shouldn't? That's crazy to me.:+1:

No I've just come from games were third party programs and scripts not approved by the Dev or community aren't allowed unless available to everyone. This would be the first game I've come across where that isn't considered cheating. I'm pretty sure that's the norm, but not the case in this game. It fine, I learned what I needed to from this.This seems to indicate a misunderstanding of the difference between tools to hack the game itself (mainly in the case of FOF by viewing or improve ratings, etc., and tools that take the output from the game and analyze it. There's a fundamental difference in the nature of those two activities.

I'm not sure what games and communities you've been a part of but my experience with FOF and OOTP in mp are consistent in that you're allowed to create whatever you want and it isn't considered cheating. Now if you somehow hack the game and, say, boost your player's ratings then yes that's cheating. But pulling the combines of the draftees into Excel and sorting them is hardly cheating.Right. Similar to my comments above. There's a huge difference between outputting data that everyone has access to and analyzing it and hacking the game.

True enough, who is on duty to make sure those kinds of scripts aren't being used? I assumed the programs that were available in that bundle that someone put out with DA player tracker etc were the approved programs to be used.It'd be fairly obvious if someone was cheating at the level garion and I have mentioned. It happened a decade or so ago in a league I was in; for three or four straight drafts, Samdari picked good players with every single pick, all of them being guys who would eventually increase in ratings. In those drafts there were multiple cases of him taking guys who made no sense over other guys in the draft, (i.e. CB1 had better combines AND bars than CB2, but he took CB2, and CB2 proceeds to go +25 and CB1 -5). Ratings in FOF2K4 (the version in use there) were unencrypted. It was clear that he was looking at the real ratings. He was kicked out of the league, and rightly so. And starting in the very next version of FOF, ratings were encrypted, thus practically eliminating that possibility.I can see now about half the people are running their own stuff.3 or 4 guys in this thread != "half"


To be honest, the main reason that I don't release any of my tools is that they are crude. I develop them just enough to be useful to me, but they are certainly not polished.

Also, he supports those programs, which takes time. Sometimes alot of time, which is great for him, but not something I really want to do right now.+1000000000000000

Yup. The scripts and queries I use apart from Draft Analyzer rely on draft_personal.csv and players_personal.csv. In order to release any of this stuff, I'd have to create a user interface that allows 32 different people to upload those two files, and another user interface that allows people to adjust their weights. Right now all that stuff is just hard-coded. It's wayyyyyyyyy easier to do what I do for one team than for 32.

Just to be clear, there's not a thing that utilities or spreadsheets do that you can't see with your own eyes and a copy of FOF.Also, a relevant data point: some people have been playing this game for 18 years. It's that experience that tells them what to look for, not the utilities.Bingo. I've written code to look through the data in the csvs for lots of different little things that I've observed over years and years of playing lots of FOF1-FOF8. I could do everything I'm doing with scripts and queries manually; it'd just take me longer. If I had to do it all manually, I'd drop down to 1 or 2 leagues instead of my current 7. I suspect the same would be true for others.

Also, (or Dola as the kids say)
You're playing a text-based sports sim, and are surprised that there are players playing it, who like analyzing stats? That's pretty much this game's target market.Another +1000000000000000.

I certainly know now there must be a treasure trove of information, strategies and programs not being shared. What a sad day.I LOLed at the ending of this one. Reminded me of a Trump Tweet. :D

[Mobarak]

Also, (or Dola as the kids say)
You're playing a text-based sports sim, and are surprised that there are players playing it, who like analyzing stats? That's pretty much this game's target market.


Never said I was surprised at that.. it's what the game is... it's why we have all the export/import options... Using Excel to find stats is not what I'm really referring to. What would surprise me is if someone is actually creating other programs similar to DA etc, and making the decision not to share that program with the community.

I actual thought that that bundle of programs containing DA were what the "community" had agreed would be used for the game... I just assumed that and that's my fault.

I've never played a text simulator before of any kind, every game I've played this would be unacceptable and I'm sure many of us can relate to that if we ever played any other kind of MP online game... so can we stop with the act of bewilderment that a newer player was shocked at this new realization.

Also whoever wrote DA is amazing and probably saved this game from going under a long time ago. I love you and please provide me a donate button and I'll send you some coins.

[Ben E Lou]

Using Excel to find stats is not what I'm really referring to. What would surprise me is if someone is actually creating other programs similar to DA etc, and making the decision not to share that program with the community. DA is a glorified spreadsheet with a user interface. It uses the same export files that I and others are using to analyze those. Greg outputs it in a way that's prettier, but in the end, there's no substantive difference between using Draft Analyzer and using the tools I use. It's all just analyzing data from the same spreadsheets.

[Ushikawa]

I don't code (or even macro/pivot/visual basic) at all but understand how it works and use the same principles in my Excels. The tools save time more than anything. In 7 I used GamePlan Analyzer and it was a significant advatage over those who didn't or used it but didn't really understand how it worked. In a short timeframe soneone will make a similar tool for 8, and within a few months it will be made public. Until then you can just do it with pen and paper.

IE in almost all my leagues I am top 8 in completion percentage yet bottom 8 in yards per catch. Eventually I will look at my logs to see where the big plays are coming from, YAC or deep completions, this happens when I play cover/press 1 or they throw to a blitzers zone, are certain players on the field when it happens. A tool could answer thise first 2 in a few clicks but it doesn't mean that I can't get an answer to all 3.

[Mobarak]

I didn't peg you for a Trump fan, that made me lol. You made mention about the person cheating. This is exactly what would concern me and that surprises you? If you say it isn't happening in your leagues I completely believe you, but a smart cheater wouldn't make it so obvious. In any case I notice you didn't quote Hammer as he was brave enough to put homerizm(lol) aside to remember that he to was once where I am and felt the same way, realized it wasn't an issue to worry about and continued on. i imagine I'll do the same.

[Mobarak]

DA is a glorified spreadsheet with a user interface. It uses the same export files that I and others are using to analyze those. Greg outputs it in a way that's prettier, but in the end, there's no substantive difference between using Draft Analyzer and using the tools I use. It's all just analyzing data from the same spreadsheets.


He still put it in a nice looking box with a bow and made it public

[Ben E Lou]

He still put it in a nice looking box with a bow and made it public
I wasn't denigrating Analyzer; I was saying that those who are using other tools are very likely doing the same stuff that Analyzer does, just with different ways of weighting data.

In any case I notice you didn't quote Hammer as he was brave enough to put homerizm(lol) aside to remember that he to was once where I am and felt the same way, realized it wasn't an issue to worry about and continued on. i imagine I'll do the same.Come to think about it, you and Hammer do remind me of one another in some aspects.

[Mobarak]

I wasn't denigrating Analyzer; I was saying that those who are using other tools are very likely doing the same stuff that Analyzer does, just with different ways of weighting data.

Come to think about it, you and Hammer do remind me of one another in some aspects.


It is easy to remember those who challenge you. Really,?, you called it a glorified spreadsheet, that doesn't sound like a positive review. I'm sure that program in all it's simplicity has saved hundreds maybe thousands of players from dropping this game. I don't know why my tenacity and persistence to learn this game offends you so much. My guess is you felt obligated to answer and then felt annoyed when I didn't like your answer. I apologize.

[QuikSand]

Had no idea this thread would turn out to be so much fun. Was just looking for some pointers.

Carry on.

[Mobarak]

Had no idea this thread would turn out to be so much fun. Was just looking for some pointers.

Carry on.

Man I just want to learn about the game.

[johnnyshaka]

Good...less whining and more playing and you'll be well on your way.

[Mobarak]

Good...less whining and more playing and you'll be well on your way.

A curse on your house sir.

[johnnyshaka]

???

[Mobarak]

???


that's right

[johnnyshaka]

Good stuff.

Not all that worried, though, you'll probably quit cursing before it even starts.

[Mobarak]

Good stuff.

Not all that worried, though, you'll probably quit cursing before it even starts.


You contributed nothing on my questions or on this thread outside of insulting me, this would make it twice... if that continues unchecked, i'm gonna have pretty foul things to say to you. pls stop now.

[Dawgfan19]

Had no idea this thread would turn out to be so much fun. Was just looking for some pointers.

Carry on.

Troublemaker ;)

[johnnyshaka]

You contributed nothing on my questions or on this thread outside of insulting me, this would make it twice... if that continues unchecked, i'm gonna have pretty foul things to say to you. pls stop now.

Haha...this thread got derailed the moment you entered...QS was asking about DA weights...Ben answered his questions...then you accuse Ben and everybody else in this community of cheating and holding out on you.

All I did was point out that some guys put in A LOT of time playing and analyzing the game and if you'd like to experience their success then spend more time playing the game and less time complaining here.

Reminds me of doing homework with my 8-year old...she whines about having to do it and I have to constantly remind her that if she would just do it and not spend so much time complaining about it she'd be done already and playing Barbies with her sister.

Wouldn't you rather be playing Barbies than defending your off topic discussions and cursing houses?

[wustin]

I guess I came from a competitive background where I would want everyone to have all the information and every tool available. I would want to compete on only the highest level with only the most competent of players to see if I really can be the best. I get no gratification from winning because my opponent was handicapped even to the smallest degree.

I come from a competitive background too.

http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/how-far-should-you-go-to-win

Read this and shut up. In fact everyone should read this section and if you have enough time, read the entire book.

[zsteelers]

I'm in some MP leagues as tzach.

like cleancoder, Ben, and others, I also have my own code for analyzing the *output* of the game, in particular the game logs and roster properties. writing them revived my passion for FOF. It also made me appreciate a lot more football and this game. I'm sorry if anyone feels disappointed by that, but I have tools to parse the logs and give me the info that I want to look at (e.g. should I run a press-2 blitz 1 against 113 personnel on 1st-10 against this opponent?). anyone can do this manually, although I imagine it would be tedious (it took me about 2:30h per game to game plan on defense before writing my code).

like cleancoder and Ben, I haven't released my code because it's crude, not user-friendly, and I don't have time to provide any support. perhaps more importantly, it runs on proprietary software that I use for work, with a license of about USD 2000.

Now onto the main topic of this thread.

My opinions below are more impressions than anything else -- I haven't had the motivation to go through hundreds of draft classes to do something more scientific.

my impressions below also rely on having very good scouts. With the hard combine constraints gone in FOF8, I think that scouts are crucial if you want to draft well. I wouldn't be surprised if my non-scientific opinions below are totally off in case bad scouts are used.


-weighting combines versus bars in FOF8
I tilt it towards bars since I trust my scouts, but make sure that the combines are alright specially on rounds 1-3. weights depend strongly on position and round to be drafted though -- e.g, low endurance bar bring my 1st-round prospects ratings down a lot since I want these guys to be on the field, specially if they are OL or DE. I haven't seen anyone quantify the effects of low endurance (not sure it's even possible), but my impression is that player performance plummets in a full season (this is mentioned in the help file).

in my case, weights also depend a lot on the player position relative to the scout background -- e.g., it seems to me that an OL OC with an 80 scouting bar does not do a good job of scouting RBs and TEs, but he's really good at scouting OL as you would imagine.


-how to weight static vs non-static bars/ratings

to me, again depends on player position and scout background. if I know my scout draft well at a given position, static bars are crucial.


-how to get combine skippers to rate in reasonably

Bars + interview. I've had good results so far for combine skippers with nice bars + VU or U interview.


-how much to penalize for missing constraints in FOF8

again, depends on the player and position, and how you build your roster. e.g, I'm ok having one low intelligence guy in a position group, but I don't like all my lineman being low intelligence guys. I'd skip a good prospect if he's low intelligence. Similar thing for Agility -- if I'm looking for a run stopper, i'd never take a 70-rated SLB prospect with low agility.

[garion333]

Bars + interview. I've had good results so far for combine skippers with nice bars + VU or U interview.

What he meant here is how to get combine skippers to sort well in Draft Analyzer since the lack of a combine usually shoves them far down the rankings.

[zsteelers]

my bad -- I thought he was referring to how to maximize the chances of good rates for combine skippers after PS2.

I evaluate combine skippers totally separated from the draft class. I sort the combine skippers in game, look at the 5 or so that have interesting bars, and eventually interview some of them.

[Browdy]

Playing for 18 years?! Are you kidding?

[Ben E Lou]

Playing for 18 years?! Are you kidding?FOF1 was released in September 1998.

[Julio Riddols]

Ah, the man behind the mask..

I'm onto you tzach. My Aces await their revenge.

My personal feelings on drafting now are largely undeveloped. I only used Draft Analyzer for the first time with FOF8 this past draft in the CFL, and it appears to have been a strong draft at first glance.. Waiting for PS 2 to get a true feel for it, but I think it went well.

My rule of thumb had previously been to avoid guys who have mixed "good" (red/blue) and "bad" (green) combines. Sometimes this isn't an issue with certain things like intelligence or bench reps for offensive linemen, but if both are bad I will avoid a guy.

My tiers of choice are as follows:

1: Top end bars across the board and combines that are believable.

2: Good to great bars and combines that suggest they could be even higher - My round 1 RB in CFL is an example of this that I think might be a solid pick if not a spectacular one. DA loved him on my end, ranked him 9th overall in the draft class. I don't think he will end up the best back in the class, but I think he was a very safe pick who might outperform his bars.

3: The old static bars combined with specific other bars and supporting evidence.. I.E. Man coverage with punishing hitter and interception bars for a CB that has combines to match, RB's with speed outside and power inside, or Sense Rush and Accuracy for a QB with combines to match. The rest is not necessarily negligible, but I have seen enough of these guys that they seem to be developing a pattern in my mind, which leads me to believe there is something there. DA tends to support this. The 3rd QB taken in CFL was one of these guys with his accuracy bar.

4: Offensive linemen with good technique bars and believable combines. The 5th round T I took was one of those. He is weak as hell, but I have seen enough of these wimpy guys with killer technique that I have become a believer.

5: Guys with less than 2 bad combines and a static bar that is good or better - WR's with BPR, DB's with PH, Blockers and Pass rushers with Strength bars, RBs with Power Inside or Speed Outside.

6: Special Teams studs with other functional bars. These guys are usually my middle round and late round picks unless I think there is a guy worth taking a chance on.

7: Guys with less than 2 bad combines who have one high bar supported by combines.. Run stuffing LBs with great agility, DL with great agility or great speed.

8: Return men, kickers and punters

9: long snappers.

[Nemesis]

http://www.sirlin.net/ptw-book/how-far-should-you-go-to-win


I noticed the "/how-far-should-you-go-to-win" directory text. Before I open this url, I have to ask, does this have anything to do with the New England Patriots?
:popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn: :popcorn:

[Templar]

I guess I came from a competitive background where I would want everyone to have all the information and every tool available. I would want to compete on only the highest level with only the most competent of players to see if I really can be the best. I get no gratification from winning because my opponent was handicapped even to the smallest degree.Robert James Fischer wanted to fight against the best and finally beat everyone and be the best.
Fischer had to learn from books. However, most of the best books on chess were in Russian. So Fischer then learned Russian - no whining.

Fischer was an ambitious and high competitive fighter.

What kind of competitiveness do you speak? :confused:

[Squirrel]

Some while ago I came across this post (http://www.operationsports.com/fofc/showpost.php?p=1345160&postcount=37) that I thought of when I read this thread. This comes from a thread discussing the ethics of testing / data-driven play from more than 10 years ago!

(Oh and Quik, if I thought I had anything useful to say in response to your questions, I would. But I'm a rookie and I don't lay claim to much drafting skill)

[Hammer]

Robert James Fischer wanted to fight against the best and finally beat everyone and be the best.
Fischer had to learn from books. However, most of the best books on chess were in Russian. So Fischer then learned Russian - no whining.

Fischer was an ambitious and high competitive fighter.

What kind of competitiveness do you speak? :confused:

I don't think there is any need for any more people to pile on and bully the guy. Not everyone who plays this game is an IT nerd. Some of us are sports fans who don't want to get into an IT battle for supremacy. It is a sports sim! Sure we might be in the minority but all the same we are entitled to our opinion. There are a fair few people out there who feel the same, but being Ben's board and all, don't put themselves forward. Mobarak's reaction was far from unique when all this came to his attention. As he said I am sure he will get his head around this in time. When he beats people who invest time and energy writing programs for themselves he will probably get a lot of satisfaction from that. When you have been really enjoying a game for a while and investing time, and you find out IT guys are using their skills outside of the game it is perfectly understandable to be a little taken aback.

[Ben E Lou]

Not everyone who plays this game is an IT nerd. I'm not an IT guy. I haven't taken any classes whatsoever in coding/IT/computers since 1987 (my Senior year in high school.) People like primelord and Celeval had a leg up on me because they were IT guys who had used their skills to study the game. So rather than complaining about it when primelord parsed 10,000 game logs and shortly thereafter became the first person to go 19-0 in IHOF, or when Celeval was in my division in one league and in my conference in another and out-drafting me season after season, instead I put in some time teaching myself enough about coding to better examine the things I felt I needed to be more competitive.

There are a fair few people out there who feel the same, but being Ben's board and all, don't put themselves forward.If this is true, then they're just snowflakes who can't take someone disagreeing with them. :D No one has ever been disciplined here for offering a different opinion than mine.

Sure we might be in the minority but all the same we are entitled to our opinion. Yes, you are entitled to your opinions, and I am also entitled to mine. They differ. Big deal. People disagree. Mine is related to this...When you have been really enjoying a game for a while and investing time, and you find out IT guys are using their skills outside of the game it is perfectly understandable to be a little taken aback.Because of my own experience, no I do not find it perfectly understandable when people are taken aback and whine about what someone else can do. I find it to be just.....whining. In my opinion, either invest the time to figure out how to compete in that way or other ways, or stfu with the whining about others doing so. But I find whining about how someone else is finding success to be the polar opposite of being competitive.

[Abe Sargent]

I don't use any tools, I lean on my own experiences, and we do fine. I have had strong success in mp leagues, challenges here, and more. And I have a slightly different take on who to draft than some fold here as well (I prefer showers to growers as an example. I'm more comfortable taking the 40/70 guy who slides to 55/55 than the 23/30 guy with high combines who may wind up anywhere, and often at 30/30). But it works.

[Julio Riddols]

This is an older crowd too, so the patience for things that sound like whining is probably far less here than it might be at a place like the Madden forums. Most of us are dudes in their 40's or older that just don't have the time, energy or patience to put up with such things.

It's nothing personal, I'm certain of that. People just take things a lot more harshly than they should sometimes, or they assume things and instead of considering that there is likely a reason why they are being responded to sternly, they get offended. It's nobodies fault really, but there have been countless guys who have come in here and had similar complaints and been generally confrontational when they aren't met with the warmest of greetings.

We've got some curmudgeonly bastards around here and a lot of unique and strong personalities and many of us talk to each other like old men bickering over the fiber content of breakfast foods sometimes. Generally, people who approach things without being assumptive or sounding whiny receive a far warmer reception.

As I get older I find that life runs smoother that way. There's the old phrase, when you assume, you make an ass out of u and me.

Its the wild west out here, and the fastest gun wins. You gotta work on that technique and hone your skills.. Either that, or you better hope you're lucky when you meet up at high noon with a real gunslinger.

[Ben E Lou]

Generally, people who approach things without being assumptive or sounding whiny receive a far warmer reception. I don't think that the "generally" is needed there as the qualifier, but yeah.

[zbuckley]

Seems to me the FOF community as a whole as basically shared 95% of knowledge surrounding FOF. I'm guessing Ben hasn't shared everything but he's easily shared more than then anyone else it's it's probably not even close.

[Say Helu Wave Goodbye]

Ah, the man behind the mask..

I'm onto you tzach. My Aces await their revenge.

My personal feelings on drafting now are largely undeveloped. I only used Draft Analyzer for the first time with FOF8 this past draft in the CFL, and it appears to have been a strong draft at first glance.. Waiting for PS 2 to get a true feel for it, but I think it went well.

My rule of thumb had previously been to avoid guys who have mixed "good" (red/blue) and "bad" (green) combines. Sometimes this isn't an issue with certain things like intelligence or bench reps for offensive linemen, but if both are bad I will avoid a guy.

My tiers of choice are as follows:

1: Top end bars across the board and combines that are believable.

2: Good to great bars and combines that suggest they could be even higher - My round 1 RB in CFL is an example of this that I think might be a solid pick if not a spectacular one. DA loved him on my end, ranked him 9th overall in the draft class. I don't think he will end up the best back in the class, but I think he was a very safe pick who might outperform his bars.

3: The old static bars combined with specific other bars and supporting evidence.. I.E. Man coverage with punishing hitter and interception bars for a CB that has combines to match, RB's with speed outside and power inside, or Sense Rush and Accuracy for a QB with combines to match. The rest is not necessarily negligible, but I have seen enough of these guys that they seem to be developing a pattern in my mind, which leads me to believe there is something there. DA tends to support this. The 3rd QB taken in CFL was one of these guys with his accuracy bar.

4: Offensive linemen with good technique bars and believable combines. The 5th round T I took was one of those. He is weak as hell, but I have seen enough of these wimpy guys with killer technique that I have become a believer.

5: Guys with less than 2 bad combines and a static bar that is good or better - WR's with BPR, DB's with PH, Blockers and Pass rushers with Strength bars, RBs with Power Inside or Speed Outside.

6: Special Teams studs with other functional bars. These guys are usually my middle round and late round picks unless I think there is a guy worth taking a chance on.

7: Guys with less than 2 bad combines who have one high bar supported by combines.. Run stuffing LBs with great agility, DL with great agility or great speed.

8: Return men, kickers and punters

9: long snappers.

Hi, long term lurker, first time poster here. Really like this post, it firmed up a number of concepts I was already going with.

There was just the odd guy that didn't quite fit in - decent bars, decent combines all within the constraints but nothing special at all. Depth guys that don't have the potential upsides of guys in pot 5 but aren't going to bust. Do you just leave these alone because enough of the riskier picks will work out and have higher upside?

[Hammer]

My 1.12 LB had great bars and great combines in the CFL Julio. Yet he didn't come out that well. Did you see anything bad in him?

[Mobarak]

[QUOTE=Julio Riddols;3158791]This is an older crowd too, so the patience for things that sound like whining is probably far less here than it might be at a place like the Madden forums. Most of us are dudes in their 40's or older that just don't have the time, energy or patience to put up with such things.


This explains so much.

It's nothing personal, I'm certain of that. People just take things a lot more harshly than they should sometimes, or they assume things and instead of considering that there is likely a reason why they are being responded to sternly, they get offended. It's nobodies fault really, but there have been countless guys who have come in here and had similar complaints and been generally confrontational when they aren't met with the warmest of greetings.

We've got some curmudgeonly bastards around here and a lot of unique and strong personalities and many of us talk to each other like old men bickering over the fiber content of breakfast foods sometimes. Generally, people who approach things without being assumptive or sounding whiny receive a far warmer reception.


I asked a question and got a three word answer from Ben, it didn't match what I saw in the game logs so I asked again. Slightly different answer with a few more words, still didn't match the game logs so I asked again. This went on for awhile. I guess the "thoroughly answer question" bar must be low due to age. If you don't know the answer, just say you don't know the answer. If you do and are willing to provide it, do so in a full and complete manner to prevent further agitation for yourself if the other person doesn't immediately understand your answer.

[Mobarak]

Asshats and snowflakes, maybe this is why people don't want to speak up.

[Ben E Lou]

I asked a question and got a three word answer from Ben, it didn't match what I saw in the game logs so I asked again. Slightly different answer with a few more words, still didn't match the game logs so I asked again. This went on for awhile. I guess the "thoroughly answer question" bar must be low due to age. If you don't know the answer, just say you don't know the answer. If you do and are willing to provide it, do so in a full and complete manner to prevent further agitation for yourself if the other person doesn't immediately understand your answer.What question are you talking about? I don't recall this. (It may have been before I recognized your user name...)

[Mobarak]

What question are you talking about? I don't recall this. (It may have been before I recognized your user name...)

Was back in Feb I believe, about the double teaming. Our communication took a nose dive as your responses got more and more short/sarcastic because I kept pointing out the answers didn't match up with the game log. Since then everything has been pretty negative, I would really like to move past it.

And although I may have joined and dropped from leagues that sim every other day minus the GML, I don't think you would give me anything less than 100% participation with the CCFL and IHOF. Someone mentioned to me that this may have rubbed people the wrong way, I apologize for that, but I in no way left those teams any worse than they were, in fact I never dropped out in the season and I finished the season in one league before dropping so not to cause problems.

[Mobarak]

What question are you talking about? I don't recall this. (It may have been before I recognized your user name...)

Was back in Feb I believe, about the double teaming. Our communication took a nose dive as your responses got more and more short/sarcastic because I kept pointing out the answers didn't match up with the game log. Since then everything has been pretty negative, I would really like to move past it.

And although I may have joined and dropped from leagues that sim every other day minus the GML, I don't think you would give me anything less than 100% participation with the CCFL and IHOF. Someone mentioned to me that this may have rubbed people the wrong way, I apologize for that, but I in no way left those teams any worse than they were, in fact I never dropped out in the season and I finished the season in one league before dropping so not to cause problems.

[gstelmack]

First off, DA IS a glorified spreadsheet. It was easier for me to code up something in C# than it was to create Excel macros, because I suck at Excel. That's all it is. It's never been an insult about DA.

Second, attached are the weights I use. I've shared them in the past, but I also continue to refine them. One note: PlayerTracker reads these weights and lets you look at players with their DA ratings from the draft, which is very useful to refining your ratings, once you've built up a history. You can tweak the weights in DA, load up PlayerTracker, and look at a batch of players to see how your DA weights correspond to player ratings, then loop on this to refine them. I'm still building up enough of a pool of FOF8 players to do this myself (IHOF is the only FOF8 I play, and I just about have enough seasons in it to start), but maybe these weights will give you a start. I am undervaluing combines here, but I also tend to have a pretty good scouting staff which helps.

Third, there's an issue in DA I'm trying to work through. It uses height / weight / bar pattern to determine if a player would be better rated at another position. This works great for defense, where positions are very interchangeable in FOF8. However, I think it's a gaping hole at O-Line right now, where an LT may have average LT combines but great C combines, and gets rated higher as a result. I'm not sure I should be calculating a combine score per position, but instead just using combines from their original position. I'm still analyzing and welcome opinions on this.

[Ushikawa]

pne of the first things i do after exporting from DA is reassign the OL positions and then just eyeball to see the coloring of the bars after the switches.

[Mobarak]

First off, DA IS a glorified spreadsheet. It was easier for me to code up something in C# than it was to create Excel macros, because I suck at Excel. That's all it is. It's never been an insult about DA.

Second, attached are the weights I use. I've shared them in the past, but I also continue to refine them. One note: PlayerTracker reads these weights and lets you look at players with their DA ratings from the draft, which is very useful to refining your ratings, once you've built up a history. You can tweak the weights in DA, load up PlayerTracker, and look at a batch of players to see how your DA weights correspond to player ratings, then loop on this to refine them. I'm still building up enough of a pool of FOF8 players to do this myself (IHOF is the only FOF8 I play, and I just about have enough seasons in it to start), but maybe these weights will give you a start. I am undervaluing combines here, but I also tend to have a pretty good scouting staff which helps.

Third, there's an issue in DA I'm trying to work through. It uses height / weight / bar pattern to determine if a player would be better rated at another position. This works great for defense, where positions are very interchangeable in FOF8. However, I think it's a gaping hole at O-Line right now, where an LT may have average LT combines but great C combines, and gets rated higher as a result. I'm not sure I should be calculating a combine score per position, but instead just using combines from their original position. I'm still analyzing and welcome opinions on this.

Let's not get to caught up on how easy it was to make etc.. Angry Birds is a glorified Atari game. It's not how easy it was to make but the fact that it was shared.

[gstelmack]

Fine, I'll get involved in the sharing conversation.

Ben has shared a TON of stuff, as have many others. He has shared gameplans, much of the statistical data and analysis that has helped identify combine correlations, the original combine threshold bits, etc etc etc. The only thing he isn't sharing here is his very specific algorithms for evaluating draft talent. You might as well be asking him to share his draft list in a particular league.

As to the curmudgeonly bits, that comes out from all of us when someone either A) keeps picking at an answer they get or B) refuses to do any research on their own. It's like dealing with kids sometimes: they ask a question, you answer, and they (my daughter LOVES to do this to me) start lawyering the answer to death. Well, if you've thought about it that much, why ask? If you didn't want my opinion, why did you ask for it?

Lots of folks get ticked off when told it's in the help file and they should read it, in part because there's lots of other good info in there, too. That's not being unfriendly, it's trying to help them, but they don't want to learn to fish.

I don't know what the original topic was that got you all bothered, and I have no idea how much of what I'm about to say applies, so maybe I'm totally off base, but I've seen it happen time and time again where someone new comes in, doesn't want to read, doesn't want to search the forums, doesn't want to figure out the etiquette or what the history of the group is, doesn't want to feel their way around, they just want to come barging in and have all their answers handed to them thank-you-very-much. This group here puts A LOT of work into this game, supporting it with utilities, statistical analyses, web pages for multiplayer leagues, write-ups, or just fun stories. Maybe the folks who want to learn from that should be a bit more patient and willing to put a bit of effort in as well and they'll find the group far more accepting.

[Mobarak]

I'm not really sure why we are beating this dead horse again. Nobody has do anything for anyone. the game isn't sinking.. new players all time. Ton's of options for league's and they Dev is behind his game like no other.

This was all so trivial I feel silly for having brought it up, really. I'm just gonna play my three league till the wheels fall off and hope that's later rather than sooner.

[Ushikawa]

Fine, I'll get involved in the sharing conversation.

Ben has shared a TON of stuff, as have many others. He has shared gameplans, much of the statistical data and analysis that has helped identify combine correlations, the original combine threshold bits, etc etc etc. The only thing he isn't sharing here is his very specific algorithms for evaluating draft talent. You might as well be asking him to share his draft list in a particular league.

As to the curmudgeonly bits, that comes out from all of us when someone either A) keeps picking at an answer they get or B) refuses to do any research on their own. It's like dealing with kids sometimes: they ask a question, you answer, and they (my daughter LOVES to do this to me) start lawyering the answer to death. Well, if you've thought about it that much, why ask? If you didn't want my opinion, why did you ask for it?


Lots of folks get ticked off when told it's in the help file and they should read it, in part because there's lots of other good info in there, too. That's not being unfriendly, it's trying to help them, but they don't want to learn to fish.

I don't know what the original topic was that got you all bothered, and I have no idea how much of what I'm about to say applies, so maybe I'm totally off base, but I've seen it happen time and time again where someone new comes in, doesn't want to read, doesn't want to search the forums, doesn't want to figure out the etiquette or what the history of the group is, doesn't want to feel their way around, they just want to come barging in and have all their answers handed to them thank-you-very-much. This group here puts A LOT of work into this game, supporting it with utilities, statistical analyses, web pages for multiplayer leagues, write-ups, or just fun stories. Maybe the folks who want to learn from that should be a bit more patient and willing to put a bit of effort in as well and they'll find the group far more accepting.

+1 as a freeloader

[trixter]

I want to get deeper into analytics but dont know anything about coding nor do i have the time to spend time individually sorting through the game logs. Any tips on what language to learn and where to start?

[Vill]

how much to penalize for missing constraints in FOF8 Much less than previous versions. In FOF8, roughly 25% of 50+ players, 20% of 55+ players, and even 15% of 60+ players are misses on at least one constraint. Further, a *lot* more players (more than double, I think) are within the constraints, so it's no longer a case of just grabbing a constraints guy in the 7th round and there being a 25% or better chance that he's a starter-quality guy.

In short, there are quite a bit more constraint-missers who are starters, and quite a bit more constraint-hitters who are teh suk--enough of both that while I pay attention to them, they're not a major factor.

How many % of within constraint players come in under 50?