Comparing 2k7 vs FOF7 draft experience

[zbuckley]

I'm curious how others feel about the new fof7 draft engine. I felt like I had a pretty good handle on drafting in 2k7 and now I feel I can't apply what I did in 2k7 and have the same results. To complicate things it seems really difficult to figure out if movement is unmasking or volatility in some cases. I haven't done any testing and the following comments are from limited MP drafting experience. (I wanted to make sure there was a disclaimer)

The combine combine combine strategy doesn't seem as successful as it was in 2k7. I've seen prospect with out of the park combine scores that would be without a doubt sure studs in 2k7 and yet in FOF7 i'm finding myself question so of these prospects. It seems you can no longer look for the red and blue combine scores and just assume it will translate to a can't miss prospect.

Those sure fire masked pair bars don't seem to exist anymore. At least not near as much as they had in 2k7. Even now if I see a mask pair i'm not 100% confident it will result in a creeper.

I've been focusing more on static bars and I've noticed there seems to be more draft prospects with very nice static bars producing average combine scores.

I haven't drafted a player in FOF7 that has more than 3 years experience and with the additional uncertainty around player develop / unmasking there's not much i'm basing these comments on. I'd be curious to hear others chime in with their opinions.

[aston217]

I haven't done a FOF7 draft on my own, but I've helped out with a couple.

I'd point to what Ben said before about the case where another GM saw a masked player, who ended up bumping a lot -- except Ben's (better) scout never saw the mask, and just saw the high bars to start with. Also what MalcPow said about using bureau grades as a starting point for each prospect.

It's less looking at every player and figuring out with high confidence what he is exactly in every bar. There's a lot of "so here are the good signs, let's make a guess." And given that many draft picks are, by virtue of their low cap and 4-year bonus, effectively stuck on your team for a little while, making judicious guesses is the best anyone can do.

I like this, because it rewards good team managers while taking the advantage somewhat out of the hands of the guys (you know who ;)) who knew the bar patterns and combine cutoffs. At least that's my impression.

[Rumplebeanskin]

I'm new here, so apologies for that. Don't wanna take you off topic, as this is sure to be a very educational read for me.

Can some one explain masking? And masked pairs? I've seen both phrases used a ton in a lot of draft and scouting threads. If someone can just give me a quick explanation, I'll go back to reading :)

[aston217]

In FOF2k7, player ratings were peeled back like an onion. They'd start somewhere, and then gradually move in the same direction towards their true ratings over the next several years of their careers.

The initial rating is regarded as "masked"; some players are heavily masked and some aren't very masked at all. Some guys you'll see as about their true ratings right off the bat. Some guys will show up 30-rated when they are in reality 70-rated. Their rookie TC will tell you with a great deal of confidence which direction they are headed in, and how far down that road (any uncertainty usually could be sorted out with a few other tricks).

"Masked pairs" refers to how some bars, if masked, would always unmask in the same direction. For example, a WR's Route Running and ST bars always moved in the same way, up or down. Understanding that this was how it worked gave you big clues about draft prospects and what they were going to end up looking like.

Anyway, this is all "old game" stuff. In FOF7, player ratings seem to bounce around haphazardly for their first few years before settling into a clear picture. Instead of consulting ratings tracker charts to remember exactly what players actually were (and you could nail it down pretty damn close right off the bat), you now have to in many cases just say, "Hey, I can't totally know, but if I keep this guy around for maybe three seasons, then I'll be able to make a confident guess."

[Rumplebeanskin]

Excellent explanation. Thanks for that

:+1:

[Julio Riddols]

"Hey, I can't totally know, but if I keep this guy around for maybe three seasons, then I'll be able to make a confident guess."

I've had a lot of hit or miss drafts in my short time with FOF Seven, but I come back to this phrase a lot. I think it is ultimately an awesome thing. Sometimes you get guys who you just know are good right out of the gate, and sometimes you get a guy who is up and down and you have to kind of give him a shot to play and see what happens, or wait until his bars settle. It does a great job of mirroring reality in that there are very few instances of a player just totally crapping out and being hopeless before he plays his first game.

I'm still using the combine strategy mostly, but I'm beginning to come around on solid bars and high development % as well. I feel like both styles are about equal in viability for me at the moment. I think I like it, I feel like I have enough control over some guys to make some nice selections early, then the later rounds become a crap shoot like in real life.

If anyone in the NFL knew Geno Atkins would be the player that he is, he wouldn't have fallen to round 4. Same could be said for numerous other players.. But a vast majority of stars are drafted in round 1 and 2, and FOF Seven seems to be in that vicinity of realism. Patterns will probably emerge at some point, but I'm fairly certain that there is enough intentional noise in the data to make it near impossible to pin things down to the level we had with 2k7.

[gstelmack]

It depends in part on your combine accuracy setting - WOOF has this at 25, so I barely look at combines anymore, except maybe for high picks where I'd like both big bars and big combines.

Good scouting is CRUCIAL now, so I try to get a good scout and then listen to him. I'll make mistakes either way, but I probably make fewer by hiring a good scout and going with what he says.

[Rumplebeanskin]

With the new system, in comparison to the descriptions of the system in place for 2k7, I just think about how the current system closely fits the scenario of Vernon Gholston IRL. How many times do you think the Jets front office sat around and thought "You know what, this guy should be really good!". Combine was ridiculous, everything about him looked right. Just think how their decision making process probably included the same indicators used in FOF7. The Jets gave him 3 years, and it never panned out.

I'm very encouraged by the descriptions from people in here about the draft/scouting experience in FOF7.

[garion333]

I'm curious if anyone has noticed a pattern in players that go + current and - future in Pre 2 bit then hit close to their original future rating. Or even drop in the first camp or two and then recovers.

Meaning, is there a rhyme or reason to it or does it happen randomly?

Based on what Julio is saying we need to evaluate players with three seasons of data and bars as opposed to just the initial camp(s). I definitely see this as more realistic, but have yet to find a correlation between what happens in a players first camp and the subsequent recovery.

[beeznik]

It depends in part on your combine accuracy setting - WOOF has this at 25, so I barely look at combines anymore, except maybe for high picks where I'd like both big bars and big combines.

Good scouting is CRUCIAL now, so I try to get a good scout and then listen to him. I'll make mistakes either way, but I probably make fewer by hiring a good scout and going with what he says.

Unfortunately, we only get 12 interviews. I really miss having 60.

[Yoda]

I am still working on scouting. Has a very unsure feel about it.

I've posted about this a couple of times, but no one has responded, I guess because no one really has a solid opinion about it.

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/ccfl/ben/playercard.php?playerid=27504

I drafted him at 1.11. I remember he had pretty solid combine scores. I was disappointed when he came out with a future of like 54 then dropped down to like 29. But, I started him anyway. Now in his 4th season, his rating sits at 37/37 BUT he leads the league with a 104 rating.

So, is he masked? Is it because I am such an awesome game planner (pffft)? Is it because I have 2 good WRs (and nothing else)?

[gstelmack]

QB Brandon Baker Player Details (http://www.fof-woof2.com/playercard.php?playerid=5004) has a 90.3 QB rating through 5 games so far - when you have lots of talent around the QB, he can look pretty good. I think there are other factors as well - formations known is a big one for avoiding familiars, and this guy has the good sense rush rating to avoid sacks. And I've got a really good RB so the load is not on the QB and keeps the defense honest.

What's interesting on your player is you have him 37/37 while the league scout is 34/36, so the league scout thinks he still has some room to grow.