QB -> RB Switch

[cuervo72]

Anyone have much experience with this? I have a QB that I think might be a good candidate, as I'm skeptical how he'd turn out as a QB. So I'm considering seeing how he might look as a RB...unfortunately there is no going back to make him a QB again after a switch.

The game puts the switch at "72% of ratings", but initially in-game the switch looks much better than that (though that obviously has been shown to be deceiving).

General thoughts?

[waitforit]

I had a QB once who ran a 4.3 40 and had the ideal size and height for a RB. He had terrible passing ratings, so I did the switch and he had an absolutely awful ratings at running back.

[Joker]

I had a QB once who ran a 4.3 40 and had the ideal size and height for a RB. He had terrible passing ratings, so I did the switch and he had an absolutely awful ratings at running back.

Ron Mexico?

[cuervo72]

I had a QB once who ran a 4.3 40 and had the ideal size and height for a RB. He had terrible passing ratings, so I did the switch and he had an absolutely awful ratings at running back.

That's my concern.

FWIW, this is how he looks before the switch:

http://www.thefobl.com/users/cuervo/reichert-qb.gif

And this is what he looks like with the switch *proposed*:

http://www.thefobl.com/users/cuervo/reichert-rb.gif

If he came out anything like that, it would be a no-brainer. I'm thinking that's probably not going to be the case, but for a 6th round pick there isn't a ton of downside (I'm not convinced he'd make an ok QB - though I do think his avoid INT is at least ok).

[Carman Bulldog]

How did you get that *proposed* picture? Am I missing something?

[cuervo72]

By making the position change, but before the actual file is processed by the commish. It'll give you a set of bars, but the real change isn't made until the commish processes your export. If you don't have the change in the export, no change.

So that set of bars could be completely different from what really happens. And they usually are. Pretty sure this was done so you couldn't for sure know what the change would be, bad or good. So I'm really not sure how much stock I should put in it at all - my 78/78 QB for instance looks something like 33/65 when I "fake" change him, which I seriously doubt would be the case. :)

[Vinatieri for Prez]

I will take a guess that his RB ratings will be terrible.

[cuervo72]

Yeah, looking at hit his strength and agility would be awful for a RB. I guess I'll keep him as a QB through camp, hoping for a random boom (or something else positive). If not, I can always change him later.

[QuikSand]

Yeah, looking at hit his strength and agility would be awful for a RB.

Not sure if I'm hearing you correctly (and forgive me if not)... but I don't think you can take FOF combine results and carry them across positions. I suspect that the combine numbers are generated based on a range appropriate for the position, rather than in some more overall fashion.

[Celeval]

Not sure if I'm hearing you correctly (and forgive me if not)... but I don't think you can take FOF combine results and carry them across positions. I suspect that the combine numbers are generated based on a range appropriate for the position, rather than in some more overall fashion.

Hm... I'm not necessarily sure. The speed and strength, at least, carry across positions for the Fastest and Strongest man competitions.

[QuikSand]

I guess I need to better articulate that. I'm not saying that this QB with a certain 40 time will have a different 40 time if he is moved to play RB. I'll try again...


Say you have a defensive tackle who graded out as one of the fastest guys at DT in the combine. But you, for whatever reason, decide that you want to move him to play OLB. The excellent 40 time that he ran as a DT might translate to a pretty bad 40 time for an outside linebacker. So, which is it? Is the combine number a good sign or a bad sign?

I would say that it remains a good sign, even if he is moved to the new position. I think the dice-rolling that goes on is basically that the player's actual ability (I guess in this example mostly as a pass rusher) is somehow connected to the combine result, and this guy (let's assume) has pretty good skills. So, in whatever order, the signal goes out to give him a pretty good rating in pass rushing technique, and a pretty good combine result for the 40 yard dash. My guess is that it's *after* that happens that the actual 40 time gets assigned, and for this guy that would be a good one for a DT.

That's my point. I think that what we learn from the combine (in terms of correlation to eventual specific skills) takes place *before* the actual numeric result of the combine takes place, and that the latter is position-specific.


So, to the original point, if cuervo above is looking at the raw scores from the combine, and saying "well, what if he were a RB with those raw combine scores?" then I believe he is making an unsupported comparison.

[cuervo72]

Which is what you were talking about with Pint in FOFL; thrown back in the pool, do his fantastic combines at LB translate to fantastic combines at DE for next draft (but within the DE scale, making him slower), or do the scores stay the same as they were previously. I gathered you had been thinking the former - that may well be right. In which case Reichert may magically convert to a RB with an agility of 7.22 and a bench of 13.

I'm undecided on this. On one hand I can see Jim basically identifying "good players" (someone I want to watch here too is DE Horace Ilardi; I *think* he might be a creeper, but because he is so light -246 - I moved him to MLB. The AI warning thinks this is positive. But, does he remain a possible creeper at the new position, or is that lost?). On the other, it is pretty goofy to just say "player X is 1.00 stdv's above average".

[Ben E Lou]

You decided not to switch him???

[cuervo72]

For the time being. I may still yet decide to switch him - doing the switch now as a dry-run has him come up as 34/50, with pretty much the same breakdown as before. Not quite as good, but almost. Though I still think it probably can't be trusted.

http://www.thefobl.com/users/cuervo/reichert-rb2.gif

He definitely established in camp that he's going nowhere as a QB (-7, no random boom), so now he'll get the switch. What is interesting here is that before he looks like 1's across the board, where now he'd be a '2' for RB. Who the heck knows there.

[CraigSca]

This is good stuff, Cuervo. I'll be watching this.

[cuervo72]

hahahahahahahahahahaha

http://www.thefobl.com/users/cuervo/reichert-rb3.gif

VfP, you are the winner!

Michael Robinson he's not - 4/18. He has a little route running, a little kick return, and a little elusiveness. Not much of anything else - no hole recognition (despite being relatively smart), a *0* for speed to the outside and only a 17 for breakaway speed - despite the 4.46 40 or the 80+ scrambling. If this guy can't get good marks in a transition there, I'm not sure who can (although, at 221 maybe he's considered too big??). Interestingly, the game thinks he'd be a better FB than RB.

Maybe it would have been a little better if done before camp, but I don't think so.

[PackerFanatic]

At least it was only a 6th rounder :)

[cuervo72]

Yep - there was little chance he was making the team as a QB anyway.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Not surprised. I have pretty much found that a switch outside the main position group is usually a total disaster that bears no resemblance often to the in-game hint of change in ratings. I do find that RB to WR can work very well for a RB with good receiving ratings.

[DolphinFan1]

Well, as a last resort you could use him as a kick or punt returner.

[cuervo72]

Probably not worth it - the RB I took in the first round has 58 for PR and 54 for KR (now, it's debatable if he should be in those roles or not), my old rb has a 42 for KR, another WR has a PR of 55, WR have KR of 61 and 46, and in the secondary I have guys with 70, 54 and 20 for PR, and 64 and 22 for KR.

[Marauders]

If you decide to change him back, does the game use those stats to interpolate his new QB stats, or does it go by the old QB stats?

I guess the Falcons shouldn't move Ron Mexico to RB after all.

[Ksyrup]

Rename him Eric Crouch, switch him to Safety, and cut his ass.

[cuervo72]

If you decide to change him back, does the game use those stats to interpolate his new QB stats, or does it go by the old QB stats?

I guess the Falcons shouldn't move Ron Mexico to RB after all.

Can't change him back - once he's a RB, the option for changing to QB is not there.


(and he's been cut Ksyrup. Didn't feel like trying a move to FB - or a joke to FS - and he wouldn't have made the team anyway.

[Kodos]

Rename him Eric Crouch, switch him to Safety, and cut his ass.

Seconded.