FOF Strategy Discussion: Why is this guy on my team?

[QuikSand]

Lots of us basically play the game in different ways, but I feel like this is a unifying concept worth elaborating on.

Why is this guy on my team?

You should be asking this question a lot as you manage your FOF roster. If you're not doing this then odds are you are not managing your team at an optimal level. If you want to become better at this game, this is a good way to think about it.

Thread to come. Hopefully not just me.

[QuikSand]

Now, on most rosters, for about half your roster, the answer to this is really obvious. The guy is a star player, a starter, a major contributor, the best guy I have at the moment for a certain task, and so forth. This conversation really isn't about the top half of your roster, in most cases. (Sure, some rosters could be improved by some pruning up there, but bear with me)

Rather, it's the bottom...say...15 guys I'm more interested in here.

And the answer that should be your warning sign if you're using it a lot is something like "well, I drafted him, and I want to see if he turns into something useful." Exceptions apply, but overall, if that's more or less the answer for ten or fifteen guys on your team, then you're probably drafting at pick 1.6 in your MP league again and wondering why you're getting lapped.

[QuikSand]

Overstatement above is for effect, obviously. And so is the pedantic tone.

I don't claim to have this game fully figured out. In fact, I'm nowhere near the top tier at some major parts of it, notably drafting. I have, however, had enough long term success with it (in its various forms over the years) to feel like I speak from some experience here. I hope others who have insight will share their views here, too, and that this could become one of those "FOF 301" type threads that has some longer term value.

So, if you're put off my my tone or attitude... sorry not sorry. Feel free to ignore.

[QuikSand]

Now, there's a wide array of answers to this basic question for player number 48 on a typical roster. Pretty often, the implied answer (especially when never asked this way) is something like "well, the game makes me field three tight ends, so I drafted this guy in the 5th round two seasons ago, and he doesn't seem like much but he's just my third guy and I don't really use him a lot, so whatever, he'll do until someone better comes along." Sound familiar? Sure, it does. Your league is loaded with TE3s like that, I bet, whether you're playing against the in-game AI or in a serious multi-player league.

My main point here is: there is serious opportunity cost to throwing away that roster spot in that way. If you don't have a good answer to the question WITGOMT? then you're treading water while others are moving ahead. You're losing ground. Likely in a very small way with that TE3 slot, but accumulate it over the bottom third of your roster, and over multiple seasons, and it definitely adds up.

[QuikSand]

The burnout draft pick. Okay, we all have them (well, some draft sharps have fairly few, but still). He had some nice bars or intriguing combines or whatever it was that made you spring a mid-round pick on him a couple seasons ago. But in his first preseason reveal, he fell from 18/49 to 19/36, and now he seems to be heading toward 24/24. There's nothing too captivating about him, no individual bars/skills that merit some special discussion, so he's just sitting there eating a roster spot. He's waiting to play out his 4yr rookie contract, when you'll just let him walk.

Right? Again, sounds familiar, right?

Is he still on your team going into his 3rd season because... you're holding out hope for a random boom? Or are you just holding on to whatever motivated you to pick him in the first place? Hmm, sounds too close for comfort now, right?

This is the fallacy of sunk costs, at least in part. You picked him. You had decided that he was worthy, at some prior point. Now, your assessment of him is unreasonably inflated because of this. You bought in, you want that choice to be redeemed.

My central argument here is that it's time to move on from that player. And the guiding principle should be, at least with these marginal roster slots, finding a better answer to the WITGOMIT? question. One based on something that actually helps your team, either right now, or down the line.

[QuikSand]

What can you get out of your TE3?

Let's assume, for the moment, that you're content with your two two guys there. Let's think through some better answers to the WITGOMT? question for your TE3:

-he is good enough to play productively if my top guys are injured
-he has specific skills that make him situationally valuable

GREAT. Now we're talking. This is much better. If you can get such a guy, that's basically a top-tier TE3 answer for WITGOMT. A guy with certain skills you value, like a solid run-blocker who lacks receiving skills... great. Personally, I love that sort of player, more so in FOF8 than in any prior version.

But...what is those guys are either not available or not affordable? Going to be common. Either you can't draft well enough to find this guy in round 5, or your league values these guys enough so that they are picked clean by the time you're looking (a larger issue, on hold for now). It's going to happen.

What are some other pretty good WITGOMT answers?

-he is a good special teams contributor
-he is young and developing, and figures for a real role someday
-he has been on the team a long time, and is a cohesion plus when he plays

Okay, also good. Better than just idle draft inertia.

The one to worry about here is "someday." Is he really going to be worth something? Why is that? I think making good decisions about who is and is not worthy of a long term commitment is a major part of this game, arguably a bit beyond the scope of this thread (but very related). Anyhow, I think inexperienced FOFers are generally too liberal in seeing future roles for their own players, with elements of the fallacy discussed above surely underlying that.

A player that really has a future role as a contributor... good WITGOMT? answer. A player that you're just lying to yourself to say so... less good.

Special teams is a solid answer here, especially for a position like TE3. Cohesion is subtle, but in serious cases, it's a powerful thing in this game. If my TE3 has been on my roster for 8 years, I will gladly put him on the field occasionally, even if he's merely a 15/15 rated player. Cohesion matters in this game -- but only for the players who are actually in the game at the time.

That's the easy stuff. Good answers, and pretty good answers.

What do you do if you've run out of those guys? Here's where, in many cases, you need to have a way to organize the bottom of your roster, including the guys who figure to spend most of the season in the inactive list.

[QuikSand]

Oh, one more thing to mention as an underrated answer to WITGOMT?

-my top guy(s) have endurance problems, this guy can play now

Important, if true. I don't claim to understand how big a deal an overworked player is, but it's heavily featured in the game, so we're well advised to assume it matters. So... the more you need to actually play your depth guys, the more important it is to have useful skills there. And conversely, the less you have the luxury of just using one-skill specialists or special-teams-only types. It's an important underlying variable in all this.

And there's a subtle takeaway there. High-endurance starters will enable your team to do more valuable things with your roster depth. That's an underappreciated part of that (absurdly over-important IMO) rating in FOF.

[QuikSand]

I have more to say, but will park it her for right now. I wanted to set up a framework for a useful thread here. Hope this has done so.

[MIJB#19]

Looking at my 53-men roster for the upcoming IHOF Season, my final cuts had me in the process of doing basically what QuikSand is describing: what are these guys going to do for my team?
After filling all the depth charts, I had 15 spots remaining. I'll go through them one by one, mentioning years in league, years on team, position and scouted ratings.

3rd (3) QB 21/35
If disaster strikes, I want to have a half-decent backup QB, but this time around, I'm not sure either my QB1 (32/32 newly signed veteran) or QB2 is going to be my starter of the future. Actually traded for a better QB (56/56) a couple of hours ago, but still want to keep one of the other two I was picking between. The other guy will have to go, I can really use the roster spot elsewhere.

12th (12) QB 3/3
This is an elite kick holder (top5 in the league), easy decision to keep him. Although this time around, It could be acceptable to carry the newly signed veteran as the kick holder.

3rd (1) RB 29/29
I want a 3rd RB in case of injuries, I've got a guy that can play both the speed outside and the up the middle runner roles. (I made a big mistake letting my actual RB1 walk away in free agency after not giving him a worthy offer when he was still restricted.)

R (1) FB 26/46
This is potentially the best run blocking FB in the league, got to keep this guy. It would seem to make sense to start him, but the guy ahead of him is in the 4th season on team and the 2nd best run blocker at FB. This rookie could potentially even play the 3rd down RB role, had we not have had the aforementioned RB3 already capable enough.
Fwiw, FB is a position where FOF loves to force your team to play 1 guy on special teams, the starter will have to play that role as well.

4th (4) C 27/33
4th (4) G 40/40
Rookie (1) T 23/38
All here to meet roster minima if injuries strike. The C and G have cohesion as a booster in case they need to jump in. The T3 is a project, won't be useful before his 3rd or even 4th season.

2nd (2) 36/50 DE
4th (4) 27/32 DT
Five DL players are in my depth chart, some are low on endurance. This DE should be a starter next season. This DT, just like DT3, has been around long enough to develop into an acceptable replacement if a starter goes down, both in skill and having some cohesion value.

5th (5) OLB 10/10
11th (2) OLB 30/30
Rookie (1) ILB 22/47
This is a weird situation, I haven't carried this many LB in years (real time!). My depth charts contain 4 different slotted LB, based on their run stopping or pass protecting skills. I used to have 2 clearcut starters and an ok LB3 still way ahead of the rest of the bunch by skills. With 3 new guys on the team, things are different though. For cohesion, it might be better to stick with plugging only 1 of the new guys in any given formation, but both guys are a clear improvement over what we had last season.
Hereby mentioned LB5 and LB6 are elite special teamers, nothing more than just that. The real decision here is whether I have the 46th active spot available for that LB6, right now I don't. LB7 is a rookie, decent enough to be an acceptable starter in year 3, when one of my 3 veteran starters will likely be retired.

4th (2) CB 37/37
2nd (2) CB 31/38
Our CB4 is actually a top10 kickoff returner, here mentioned CB6 is a 2nd year player close behind and should replace CB4 next season. Listed CB5 is good enough to play in BnR based formations, in case of injuries at this position group and decent enough special teams player to keep active. Is basically on the active role bubble with the LB6 and S4.

4th (4) S 30/38
Was meant to become the new starting SS this season ahead of our 9th year veteran, but he's still behind in development. Already decent enough to play a dimeback role if another S goes down to injury, might fall out of favor eventually. Lacks special teams skills to consider for the active roster, will only see action if one of the three active S gets hurt.

I might add here that I kept 4 TE active, apparently we have 2 receivers and 2 blockers. And 6 WR as well. 6th best WR is our 12/12 over the hill punt returner, WR4 and WR5 are 40/40 4th and 31/31 8th year on the team, the latter already had a 1000-yard season on his resume. As they are all slotted in the depth chart, the 16th and 17th players from the bottom are in that group. Just like CB5, TE4 or WR5 could still be sacrificed from the active roster for the extra special teams LB.

[corbes]

FOF8 allows for some situation-specific personnel and playcalls, so I have a few roster spots that I routinely use for players who fit the needs of those situations. My third tight end gets his number called a couple times, for example, and I like to have some defensive players on hand for the passing downs, etc.

Otherwise you'd better be a kick returner, special-teams gunner, position leader, creeping young player, or an affinity/cohesion bonus.

[RedKingGold]

FOF is a general manager sim where the heart is team construction and salary cap management. So, if you’re not looking at your complete roster as Quik suggests above, why are you playing it?

[Squirrel]

Subscribing. I'm pretty familiar with the chemistry and cohesion reasons for selecting roster filler guys. Not really familiar with the logic for selecting effective gadget / one-job guys, with the exception of the odd situational pass rusher which I've done reasonably well with.

[QuikSand]

Okay, there are a few places this conversation goes. But maybe the least obvious among them is this:

If the reason you're keeping a guy around is because he will/could help you NOW, then focus on his positional experience

The little ratings below the skill-by-skill bars... color coded to show how familiar/comfy the player is playing the position. It matters.

For guys who are just going to help the team later on, you can be fine giving him a chance to learn on the job. It will help his development.

For guys who are your WR4, your LB4, your S3, and so forth -- players who are going to see the field and contribute -- consider veterans who know what the hell they are doing. These guys are underappreciated in the FOF world, and most of them are worth more to your team right now than that faded-draft-pick guy.

[Julio Riddols]

That's a perspective I hadn't considered to be honest with you, Quik. Might be one of the little things I haven't been doing that may be robbing my teams of some of their potential. Maybe there is something to be said about keeping a guy past his prime as a scheme familiar cohesion guy who knows what we need. I tend to have a pretty itchy trigger finger when it comes to older players and maybe I should re-examine that over the next few seasons and see what comes of it.

[bdubbs]

I definitely have to agree with a lot of this. I think some of the most valuable guys are the role players who are only good at one thing because they can be had for cheap.

For me when it comes to a guy with experience I try and value production over ratings, and also pay close attention to size. In my opinion it makes the 34 defenses a little harder to fill, it seems like with corners and lb's in particular I find a lot of guys who have really good skill sets but are very under weight.

There's some interesting cues in the help file as well, for example my team runs the 34 eagle variation in my MP league and the help file was useful in helping figure out what I was looking for in my defensive players.

The LDE is a 1 gap defender and the help file hints that puts them in the best position for a 34 DE to post high sack numbers. So i want to focus on guys with higher Run D / Pass rush skills at LDE than RDE, and I'm willing to sacrifice PD for PRS or PRT.

When it comes to the RDE though they are a 2 gap defender and its probably better if I look for a guy with a good run stopping bar and a high PD bar and not be concerned with his pass rush skills.

Just one example of how I dissect the team and try and figure out exactly what I'm looking for.

[QuikSand]

So, the obvious underlying direction here is chemistry. The game has a chemistry system like it or not, and it undeniably offers a way to get something out of these lower tier players.

If you take an honest look at your bottom 15, 10, or 5 players and come away with lots of them not really passing this test, then chemistry could be an important angle to improving your team. A guy sitting on your bench, but contributing toward team chemistry helps your team play better right now. These guys can be had for minimum salary in nearly every league, and sit untouched while FOFers and AI teams sit on these worthless 22/43 fading fifth rounders.

This is the simplest way to make your team better at the lower end. Find the lucky good-fit one-skill guys and use them as depth. But load up with affinities (or good chem leaders) at the lower end if you want to improve right now.

[MIJB#19]

I just went through a 53-men cut decision process. The first step was to cut from 60 to 57 after the pre-season re-scouting and volatility ratings changes. I just completed the down to 53 men process.

First wave was somewhat easy:
3rd round rookie K - turned out to not be an improvement to the guy that we had for the last 6 seasons
4th round rookie DE - completely bombed, went from a 70-ish pass rusher to a 30-ish pass rusher
5th year S - 5th year on roster, bombed in pre-season, becoming even worse than our kick return cornerbacks in coverage skills

Second wave:
7th round pick WR - no real receiving skills, punt returner, but isn't better than a free agent punt returner with kick return skills as well
5th year CB - 3rd year on roster, lacks zone defense skills, could be useful in bump and run coverage, but we signed a better safety
5th year C - used to be a decent backup, but bombed in pre-season, making our backup guard a better backup at center
6th year CB - top10 kick returner, we have a talented 3rd year player soon to be equally good in returning kicks, slightly better in coverage skills, while the veteran struggled to live up to his status as top10 kickoff returner

Who survived the last cuts as the bottom 16 on team:
5th round rookie RB - promising player, 3rd down back, special teams, needs to stick a season or two before he has enough cohesion value to carry the ball effectively
2nd year RB - newly signed, players that can return punts and kickoffs well are rare, they help save a roster spot elsewhere
5th year RB - looks unimpressive, but ran for 4.96 ypc last season, cohesion
2nd year FB - backup to the starter, run blocker and decent in special teams, which the game loves to use fullbacks on
[random TE] - game requires 3 tight ends, we have 3 blockers and a very good receiver, these guys will all play based on what we need on each formation
9th year WR - former 1,000-yard receiver, still plays with the same ratings, good on special teams, mentor, great cohesion value in case we need him to replace an injured WR3 or WR4
undrafted rookie WR - kid improved in training camp and pre-season, could turn out to be mid 60's rated if the improvement continues
2nd year RT - on the fence between him and a rookie LT to start this season
12th year RT - lost quite a bit of his skills, mentor, making him a decent backup in case of injuries
undrafted rookie DE - better than the cut 4th rounder (see above), already good enough to play in rotation as a pass rusher, we might need him as a backup plan in case the unhappy DE3 doesn't change his attitude and won't re-sign next off-season
5th year DT - decent enough to play in rotation role, but we've been deep enough at DT that he's been inactive for four seasons, cohesion should be good enough if forced to play
12th year LB - 3rd year on team, ok run stopper, but mostly a 90+ special teamer
6th year LB - nothing else but a 99-rated special teamer
11th year LB - used to be an elite linebacker, but lost quite a bit of his skills, if forced to play has enough cohesion value to make me believe he's equal to a 15-points higher rated off the street linebacker with significant rust
3rd year CB - kick returner, it was this kid or the aforementioned 6th year veteran, ok enough in coverage skills to be half-decent in a M2M or BnR coverage role, if forced into action
10th year S - starter last season, didn't decrease in ratings, looks like the worst player on team, but special teams, zone defense and interception skills are good enough to see a lot of action