Someone explain this guy to me...

[RedKingGold]

http://www.fof-ihof.com/upload/RedKingGold/robinson.jpg

Was my 2nd round selection from last year because his combines were off the charts for the safety position (1st or 2nd in pretty much every category). Started every game and had two interceptions.

Notice that the position chart seems to indicate that he is near complete development, but still has plenty of experience points to gain.

He screams creeper (which is why I drafted him), but what ratings will he creep in?

[bulletsponge]

if anyone would know it would be the Skydog


*Paging Skydog. your assistance is needed in the unworthy pleeb department*

[Ben E Lou]

Did he creep any between year 1 and year 2? If so, I'd expect him to continue to improve

[gstelmack]

Most guys I've seen that hit "10" stopped right there and lost their remaining green bars.

Is there a possibility he'd be better as a strong safety? Check the position switch and see what it says without actually hitting it.

[RedKingGold]

Most guys I've seen that hit "10" stopped right there and lost their remaining green bars.

Is there a possibility he'd be better as a strong safety? Check the position switch and see what it says without actually hitting it.

I wouldn't go by the numbers as completely developed. As Ben put it, those tags are just meant as reminders at what level the player is currently at for position experience.

In other words, this means that he's near completely developed and is on the last stage of development, but he might not yet be completely developed.

[RedKingGold]

Did he creep any between year 1 and year 2? If so, I'd expect him to continue to improve

He gained one point future post training camp his first year. Has not gained any future potential since that point.

My Prediction: He'll gain a few more points after season two training camp, and when all is said and done (in a few years game-time), will be a 54/54 type of player.

[QuikSand]

I'd say the man knows how to spend $40 in Hot-lanta.

As for his ratings and such, I got nothing. *shurg*

[jzicc]

I'd say the man knows how to spend $40 in Hot-lanta.


I was waiting for that reference

[MrBigglesworth]

I remember scouting Robinson during the draft and thinking he would be better than his future bars indicate now for sure, I wouldn't be disheartened by it.

The other part of this story though is that the pick traded away for Robinson ended up being pick 1.1 in the next year's draft.

[bulletsponge]

I remember scouting Robinson during the draft and thinking he would be better than his future bars indicate now for sure, I wouldn't be disheartened by it.

The other part of this story though is that the pick traded away for Robinson ended up being pick 1.1 in the next year's draft.


ouch

[RedKingGold]

Update:

http://www.fof-gefl.com/upload/RedKingGold/robinson2.bmp

Climbed +5/+3 upon start of FA-1 period. Looks like he's going to be the real deal eventually.

What's more interesting is that the ratings which were completely maxed out (everything but zone defense/special teams) went up while anything with a good deal of green actually went down a few future potential points.

[RedKingGold]

The other part of this story though is that the pick traded away for Robinson ended up being pick 1.1 in the next year's draft.

Blasphemy. I have no idea what your talking about. ;)

Yes, I traded my future first to get a top ten in the 2nd round to draft Robinson. As Mr. B mentioned, his combine scores were off the map and he had skills in the areas I liked the most out of my safeties.

Of course, had I had any idea that a couple of key injuries would cause my to have the worst record in the league the following season, I probably would not have made that move. However, at least my silver lining is that 1986 is probably the only draft where I would not want a top five pick b/c there is not much star power in that year.

[Hammer]

Did you keep a record of what his combine scores were?

The +5/+3 is a big deal as you say. He was a very good player for Seattle, one of my favourite players. Such a shame Kenny Easley retired early, and their partnership was so short lived.

[RedKingGold]

Did you keep a record of what his combine scores were?

I don't have the actual numbers, but based on my draft sheet he was 1st among all safeties in Solecismic test score, strength, agility, and position drill while being 2nd in the 40-yard dash.

The only test score he wasn't first or second in was the broad jump.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Hmm, I'm usually against trading a first rounder for a safety in the second round, but that's just me.

[MrBigglesworth]

Blasphemy. I have no idea what your talking about. ;)

Yes, I traded my future first to get a top ten in the 2nd round to draft Robinson. As Mr. B mentioned, his combine scores were off the map and he had skills in the areas I liked the most out of my safeties.

Of course, had I had any idea that a couple of key injuries would cause my to have the worst record in the league the following season, I probably would not have made that move. However, at least my silver lining is that 1986 is probably the only draft where I would not want a top five pick b/c there is not much star power in that year.
I'm not big on taking safeties early either, but at the time I thought it was a good value trade, getting 2.9 for a future first, especially since you liked the player so much. That it turned out to be 1.1 was just a bad break, but that will forever be associated with Robinson.

[MalcPow]

Most guys I've seen that hit "10" stopped right there and lost their remaining green bars.

Is there a possibility he'd be better as a strong safety? Check the position switch and see what it says without actually hitting it.

The problem with a younger player hitting "10" is that it seems like the scouting error or "mask" or whatever you want to call it doesn't fully come off until year 6 or so. In which case, the player is probably fully developed as his position experience would imply, but he's a 54/54 that you're seeing as a 33/37.

How is he actually playing?

[Ben E Lou]

The problem with a younger player hitting "10" is that it seems like the scouting error or "mask" or whatever you want to call it doesn't fully come off until year 6 or so.
I'm not convinced that the masking is ever removed for some players.

[MalcPow]

I'm not convinced that the masking is ever removed for some players.

That would actually make some sense from what I've seen as well. But do you mean "fully" when you say that, or do you mean there are some 55/55 guys who run around looking like 21/21 guys their entire careers?

[Ben E Lou]

That would actually make some sense from what I've seen as well. But do you mean "fully" when you say that, or do you mean there are some 55/55 guys who run around looking like 21/21 guys their entire careers?

I mean "fully." I wonder if there are 65/65 guys looking like 45/45 or so.

[Hammer]

I dug up Robinson's combine. Compare him to FS Donnie Young who we took 20 or so picks later. Young currently sits at 41/55, the 55 potential has been consistent since we drafted him.


Robinson Young AAA
Grade 5.6 5.1 **
40 4.53 4.54 4.46
sole 43 38 40
str 19 18 19.5
agility 7.15 7.17 7.08
bjump 8/02 8/06 **
pspec 49 38 48
dev 48% 29% **


I don't think he is going to be a superstar. You do see 4.3 safties with sub 7 agility, early 20's bench on occaision.

I suspect Young will hit between 55-62 actual, with Robinson just a touch better. Both have nice bars for safeties, should be fine, but not dominating players IMO.

[RedKingGold]

I dug up Robinson's combine. Compare him to FS Donnie Young who we took 20 or so picks later. Young currently sits at 41/55, the 55 potential has been consistent since we drafted him.


Robinson Young AAA
Grade 5.6 5.1 **
40 4.53 4.54 4.46
sole 43 38 40
str 19 18 19.5
agility 7.15 7.17 7.08
bjump 8/02 8/06 **
pspec 49 38 48
dev 48% 29% **


I don't think he is going to be a superstar. You do see 4.3 safties with sub 7 agility, early 20's bench on occaision.

I suspect Young will hit between 55-62 actual, with Robinson just a touch better. Both have nice bars for safeties, should be fine, but not dominating players IMO.

Out of curiousity, how have Young's ratings fluctuated since being drafted?

As said in my earlier post, I don't think Robinson will be a 80/80 stud. However, I do think he'll top out in the low 60's which is fine for me.

I liken him to another player I took in the 1984 draft (while still in FOF2K4): OG Gary Zimmerman. Zimmerman was only rated 30/34 in the draft pool, but his combine numbers were similarly off the charts. I selected him in the 3rd round, and I believe he boomed to 33/39. After two years as a consistent starter, (through the change to FOF2K7), Zimmerman is now 59/59 and looks like a very solid pick for that round.

However, that Zimmerman pick was in FOF2K4 when drafting was a little bit more predictable. I'm not too sure that we can all rely on AAA theory as a slam-dunk anymore (although it remains a very strong indicator of potential success).

[Hammer]

IIRC Zimmerman was a great player for the Vikings. These quality players who look poor in the game universe often seem a good bet.

Young came out 31/55, and has steadily moved. He has seen playing time off and on. We did have a mentor. So at 41/55 he hasn't set the world on fire, but hasn't been slow either. Pretty average development.

[MalcPow]

I dug up Robinson's combine. Compare him to FS Donnie Young who we took 20 or so picks later. Young currently sits at 41/55, the 55 potential has been consistent since we drafted him.


Robinson Young AAA
Grade 5.6 5.1 **
40 4.53 4.54 4.46
sole 43 38 40
str 19 18 19.5
agility 7.15 7.17 7.08
bjump 8/02 8/06 **
pspec 49 38 48
dev 48% 29% **


I don't think he is going to be a superstar. You do see 4.3 safties with sub 7 agility, early 20's bench on occaision.

I suspect Young will hit between 55-62 actual, with Robinson just a touch better. Both have nice bars for safeties, should be fine, but not dominating players IMO.

Yeah the off the charts safeties are the 4.38, 48 sol, 27 bench, 6.92 agility types. This guy probably is a low fifties starting quality guy, but nothing too special.

[Hammer]

I have Robinson done at 44/44 now by our scout, or is he still creeping?

[RedKingGold]

START OF 1986 SEASON
http://www.fof-ihof.com/upload/RedKingGold/robinson.jpg

AFTER FA-1
http://www.fof-gefl.com/upload/RedKingGold/robinson2.bmp

WEEK 15 REGULAR SEASON
http://www.fof-gefl.com/upload/RedKingGold/robinsona1.jpg

I'm supposed to be writing a paper due Tuesday, but I've been wanting to update this thread for a while, and Hammer's bump (and consequent PM's, ;) ) reminded me.

So, what can we take away from this? Here are several observations:

1. Notice how his "position experience" was and has been in red for all three, but pretty much all of his red bars continued to creep through his development. However, unlike before, now all of the green is gone from his player screen. Does that mean his development's completely stopped? Evidence from other SP games indicates to me that it is not.

2. How big is scouting error playing a role here? Is this guy another (albeit stronger) Eddie England? Does he play above his ratings? Or is he simply is what he ratings appear to be. From seeing different things in my SP career, as well as comments made by several others in the MP community, I'm heavily thinking that Robinson is better than a 42/42 player. Here are his career stats thus far:

http://www.fof-gefl.com/upload/RedKingGold/robinsona2.jpg

Robinson is currently 15th best in PD percentage, and tied for first in interceptions among all safeties. I don't have his tackles posted, but he recorded 50 in his first season (8.5 TK%) and currently has 59 this year with two games left (11.2%)

CONCLUSIONS: I will still update this thread if I see anymore movement, but I've seen enough to convince me that Robinson will be a solid player in my secondary for years to come. I do not think that he will be a superstar, but he will play like a 55/55 safety (much like Hammer's GEFL safety counterpart, SS Lonnie Young), which is what I wanted with that pick.

On a larger note, I think this is more evidence about the heightened scout error present in the game. The fact that Robinson still creeped while somewhere within the highest "position experience" level gives some insight to that. Plus, I've seen "fully developed" vets like this guy still gain points from off-season to off-season.

Moral of the story: We, as FOF players, MUST get away from using ratings as our ultimate guage of player value. It's clear from this example that most FOF players, and the game AI/AI would probably see Robinson as nothing more than a 42/42 player. However, his combines, and solid statistical performance thus far, seem to suggest otherwise.

While I don't mind scout error to heighten the difficulty level of FOF, I think it might be swung from difficulty to unfairness at this juncture. As has been stated by multiple learned people here, the game AI would probably take this kind of player early in the 2nd round, keep him on the bench, not re-sign him when is contract expired, and that'd be it. Similarly, most human players would probably keep him on the bench w/o seeing his potential worth.

IMO, the solution to this problem seems relatively straight foward:

1. More difficulty levels which decrease the scouting error for AI. Right now, SP is pretty much unplayable b/c I can collect a superteam of these casted off "stiffs" from other AI teams if I really wanted to. It's fine that I see a 42/42 2nd year player here, but the AI should be seeing his true worth.

2. Scouting error should be gradually reduced as player ages. In "real" football, there's not many Kurt Warners. The ones that do exist can be provided in FOF with the random boom/bust feature. 99% of the time, a player who has been around for 8 years is, what he is. There's not too many guys who hang around the league for 8-10 years, then suddenly explode out of nowhere, and if there are, they are the exception rather than the rule. Why not reward players who find these kinds of guys by gradually removing the scouting error so that by year 8, he is what he is. I think creepers do do this, but there is significant evidence (i.e. the Eddie England thread), that this guy may never get beyond 42/42 but might actually play that much higher.

Comments?

[MIJB#19]

I'm mostly wondering why all the scouts in the league thought this guy was going to be a zone defense expert with very good stamina, but when he 'fully' developed, they decided he made progress in all areas and had to compesate his progress across the board by giving up his potential in other areas. I even remember seeing scout cominbe scores that would defend the idea of Robinson going to be a great zone defender with better than advertised run D or interception skills (or both).

[cuervo72]

I've seen this happen to at least two of my IHOF players - Riddick Buff and Nolan Sieber. Buff *clearly* appeared to be a creeper, but had a huge green bar in hole rec that wasn't filling in. When he went to a "full" red/10 (players can get to it but not be completely filled out, I assume if they are at the bottom of the range), the green hole rec disappeared, and his overall rating fell to reflect this (down from 56 future to 49) .

However...since then, he's continued to creep up, gaining the points he had "lost". He's now at 55/55. My guess is he eventually gains back that evaporated green, maybe even some bars elsewhere too.

Sieber, same way but with M2M. He had a future of 42, then "busted" to 35/35 when he hit full exp, but is now to 39/39. I'm expecting him to at least get up to 42/42 again.

It's almost as if there are two masks in play, the "creeper" mask and the "experience" mask. An experience mask might be applied to get the amount of green that should appear. Except, when experience reaches max, there's an override of sorts and what is shown is just the player's current experience (as seen by the scout anyway). So there might be a disconnect...a player might only be 70% developed in a given skill, even if his experience is considered 100%. I don't know. Maybe it's a current mask (third mask?) that isn't syncing up (player is more experienced than shown but red bars are suppressed). SkyDog wondered this about his rookie RB in FOFL, who is playing like gangbusters. When the player creeps (the usual young talent deal), the masks that are still in play go away revealing more red.

[MartinD]

I suspect that the current rating is based on the bars that you see, so if you have a guy with lots of fake green in one particular bar, the 'future' rating will take that apparent potential into account. When the player reaches (apparent) full development and this fake green disappears, the overall rating will be adjusted to allow for this. (Of course, this does not take any future creeping into account...)

Martin