The monster WLB

[QuikSand]

It's been a while since I tossed out an on-topic thought. Here's one...


Okay, I think we know this much:

- In FOF, the WLB position in a 3-4 front is oddly imbalanced -- it's a full-time pass-rushing position, and it appears to just be overloaded with stats no matter what. Lousy players put up solid stats, decent guys (or guys with select ratings) can put up all-pro stats, and star-caliber players can sometimes post astronomical pass-rushing figures.

- It appears that some of this statistical weighting is at the expense of other positions. In a standard 3-4 setup, it appears that (hold your nose football purists, try to remember that this is a computer game) the main pass rush stats get assigned to the LDE and the WLB, with the NT and RDE being treated as lesser contributors - maybe more or less like defensive tackles from a more familiar looking 4-3 front. So, at a certain level, it seems more fair to compare the 3-4 WLB to the 4-3 RDE... but even that seems unfair, as we've seen so many mediocre WLB post 15 sacks and 9% PR% to make me think that's not even a fair comparison itself. The stat assignment part of the game appears, to me, to be broken.

- We also know that many of the most savvy FOF managers use the 3-4 formation, possibly driven by this position's quirks. Maybe that's driven partly or even mainly by the fact that a limited-skill WLB can be nominally very effective as a passrusher as a 3-4 WLB pass rush specialist - and that guy might only be rated 40/40 and remain cheap to sign/reneg under a tight cap, and won't cost you a top draft pick to land like a stud DE might. However, it's tough to isolate how well this works... if some of our best gameplanners are running the 3-4 for this purpose, maybe their overall success is less attributable to that fact, and more to the fact that, well, they are our best gameplanners. Tough to measure something like this.

So... where are we? And what I find especially interesting... what do we make of the high-skill WLB who posts monster stats -- 25 sacks a year, that sort of thing? Is he as valuable as a 12-sack DE? An 18-sack DE? Is he really helping the team a ton, or is just vampiring off stats from the neglected position (and doing it a bit more than a less talented 3-4 WLB is)?

[aston217]

In my opinion, the 43 and the 34 are exactly identical except for:

-naming. The 34 WLB is the 43 RDE, and the 34 RDE is the 43 RDT, and ditto for the other LB spots. (This has team management consequences though, as noted above)

-cosmetics. Stat distribution. The 34 WLB gets even more stats than the 43 RDE, whereas (caveat: I've never run a 43) the 43 stats are distributed more evenly among the four linemen.

You got right to the heart of the issue with your question, and I don't know the answer to it...is is it a simple matter of skewed stats distribution, or is the 3-4 WLB actually playing a more important role in the pass rush than any 4-3 position? I suspect it's just the former. And it's something that, given three good pass-rushing DL, even an average 3-4 WLB will put up pretty gaudy numbers. But if you have crap for pass rushers, your 3-4 WLB is likely to disappoint a little.

In my opinion the 3-4 is economically easier (if you get away with a pass rush specialist at WLB) but team management harder (because your backups at WLB and LDE aren't interchangeable, for example). I've even heard some pretty savvy vets express the opinion that the 43 dominates in this game.

Also, an x-factor in this is blitzing. Blitzing helps your pass rush statistics. The DL will only get base pass rush statistics, while 34 WLBs can also blitz from other positions. I think this counts as an advantage for 34 teams, which generally end up with a more diverse set of blitzing options at their disposal.

[corbes]

It ought to be relatively easy to test a hypothesis that a 3-4 MP team generates more recorded pass-rushing events than a 4-3 MP team. (Other than the data collection which feels like a drag but whatever.)

[aston217]

That's probably very true...although I've never been inclined to dig that deep into it.

I do think this: *ALL* your pass rushers are important. Either the 4 DL in a 43, or the 3 DL + WLB in a 3-4. Don't discount the pass rush ability on a guy just because he's say, a 3-4 NT and doesn't get assigned the stats.

I've had WLBs produce drool-worthy stats for years and years in the OSFL, but this year I added the best NT I've ever had by a mile. His PR stats are garbage, but my team - which was usually middling to good in overall PR% - has just taken off to a whole new level. I had gotten by previously with some pretty meh, or occasionally 'good' DTs.

So, just because a guy measurably isn't doing much, doesn't mean he's not making a significant impact for your team.

[stevew]

Scrubby player with high PRT at WLB-Will likely post double digit sacks and probably contend for DPOY

Stud player at WLB-Will post monster sack numbers(and other categories) and most likely win DPOY

This usually seems very consistent in my testing

[corbes]

So here's a really basic screening test I ran to see if there's something worth pursuing.

Hypothesis: A team running a 3-4 defense will generate more recorded pass-rushing events than a team running a 4-3.

Method: Using the same SP test team, sim ten identical seasons. In five of the seasons, run the defense as a 3-4. In five of the seasons, run the defense as a 4-3. Everything is identical other than defensive alignment.

Results:

1. Sacks:
No. of total sacks produced by 34: {31, 38, 39, 37, 45}
No. of total sacks produced by 43: {17, 37, 39, 43, 36}

2. Hurries:
No. of total hurries produced by 34: {75, 78, 81, 67, 91}
No. of total hurries produced by 43: {76, 70, 83, 88, 96}

3. Knockdowns:
No. of total knockdowns produced by 34: {35, 34, 33, 44, 41}
No. of total knockdowns produced by 43: {41, 36, 35, 28, 50}

Other observations: The test team ordinarily runs a 3-4. Hence, if anything, the team should have produced better results in the 3-4 than the 4-3. Also, the 34 WLB stayed at WLB in the 43 alignment so wasn't on the field as much.

Bottom line: I realize that the sample size is too small to produce any value at the margins. All I was looking for was a dramatic trend that says that the 34 produces better pass rushing stats than the 43. I'm not seeing it.

Also: I realize this wasn't Quik's original question.

Thoughts?

[Pyser]

i think when you combine the astronomical price of dt's in the game with the stats of a wlb, its easy to see why most teams run a 3-4. bottom line is its just way, way cheaper.

that is pretty much the only reason i run it. d-lineman as a whole are just way too expensive to keep around on their 2nd contract.

[TheFoosballWizard]

I've started running 4-3 defenses after originally just running 3-4 because I happened to have personnel for it. I buy into the fact that the stats tend to get dumped on certain positions but other players are still contributing to the pass rush.

I've been running this guy at 4-3 LDT for years and he hasn't put up monstrous stats, but I suspect he contributes to the pass rush:

rating window (http://i.imgur.com/Yb9ETrl.jpg)

stats window (http://i.imgur.com/bZflxZO.jpg)

As you can see, his stats aren't that good considering his ratings and the fact that he has exceptional affinity, but I have a feeling those stats are just getting funneled off to other players.

Another example from my FOFL team (http://www.thefofl.com/players/player.php?player=27074): This DT was beastly and played LDT but didn't put up absolutely outlandish stats.

If you can't find or can't afford a RDE who can do it all, an alternative I have used is to use a run stopping RDE in my base set, which I only use in running situations, and slot in a pass rusher who isn't that good at run defense in my nickel/dime. Of course, if you can get a 3-4 WLB on the cheap who can rush that's probably a better option than running a 4-3 this way.

tl;dr I don't put too much stock in DL stats. I find them only slightly more meaningful than the stats for offensive linemen.

[Nemesis]

It really depends for me. I've had seasons with sick stats for WLB. But then again, this past season, I had my WLB in CCFL have 16.5 sacks, but I only had 24 total as a team, and overall, the passrush wasn't so great. He accounted for 69% of the sacks.

[aston217]

Nemesis is the WLB guru, actually. Although I think part of what figures into those outstanding accomplishments are the poop-quality defensive linemen he likes to field next to his 100 PRT / 100 PRS / 100 END WLBs (or approximate). :p

[Nemesis]

Nemesis is the WLB guru, actually. Although I think part of what figures into those outstanding accomplishments are the poop-quality defensive linemen he likes to field next to his 100 PRT / 100 PRS / 100 END WLBs (or approximate). :p

Hey, those are super secret strategies! ;)

[Firefly]

Yeah, Nemesis' WLBs are the very definition of sick. But his teams as a whole do not put equally sick statistics. On the other hand, they do put very good stats. So I don't know what to think.

[Nemesis]

Yeah, Nemesis' WLBs are the very definition of sick. But his teams as a whole do not put equally sick statistics. On the other hand, they do put very good stats. So I don't know what to think.

No, my teams suck.

[Disturbed]

Getting a WLB with 15+ sacks really isn't that difficult, I've done it several times.

Just get guy without pass rush bars on the 3 DL spots. Don't ever blitz anyone. Have a WLB with PRT, PRS, and END big bars.

It really isn't that hard.

[Disturbed]

There was a study done on this before where it showed that by doing what I listed above it will funnel your sack/hurry numbers to your WLB.

Your overall defense might not be as good but you will have the pretty numbers on one player to show off.

[aston217]

I could be wrong, but I believe he's achieved 30+ at least twice, in MP.

[cuervo72]

This guy (http://www.thefofl.com/players/player.php?player=32128) has one such season.

And Nemesis' FOFL team this season was 14-2, so no suck.

[Firefly]

FTR, I meant sick passrush statistics

I wasn't aware that your teams sucked, Nemesis, you're in my three leagues and doing great in each.

[Disturbed]

Nemesis doesn't suck. He just doesn't toot his own horn much.

Seriously though, the formula I laid out above works, for me at least.

Also something else to consider, you need a team for the most part that can get leads and force the other team to pass. In the one league where Nemesis and I are in the same division he doesn't get nearly as many sacks because myself and the other GM (plus an AI) are all run heavy teams.

The thing is though, I find that stud linebackers tend to do better overall than guys with just the PRS, PRT, END bars.

[RedKingGold]

Well, I for one think Nemesis blows, but "suck" and "blow" are interchangable words.

[Nemesis]

FTR, I meant sick passrush statistics

I wasn't aware that your teams sucked, Nemesis, you're in my three leagues and doing great in each.
I know what ya mean. I assume everyone else understands as well.

I could be wrong, but I believe he's achieved 30+ at least twice, in MP.
In addition to the guy that cuervo72 posted, this (http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/ccfl/ben/playercard.php?playerid=18091) is the other guy.

Nemesis doesn't suck. He just doesn't toot his own horn much.
Yeah, and if I'm ever being cocky, it's because I'm joking around. And I do joke around at times.

Well, I for one think Nemesis blows, but "suck" and "blow" are interchangable words.
Hahaha, fucker.


Ultimately what Disturbed says is correct. I honestly am starting to believe that the better you stop the run, and put the offense in predictable situations (passing), the better your passrush will be. The only exception to that so far has been in NAFL where my defense really really sucks, but we're in the top 5 in PR%.

[Disturbed]

Looks like I have a shot at 30+ sacks with a guy this season...

14 games in so far

26.5 sack
30 hurries
44 QBkd

Though its only been 4 games since I switched to the defense that I use to funnel stats to my WLB.. in those 4 games he has..

14 sacks
16 hurries
24 QBkd