![]() |
|
|
#1 | |||||||||
|
Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Greensboro, NC
|
Preference Draft Strategy
I did a good bit of testing prior to the Super League preference draft, and I know that at least one league (the OSFL) has a number of new-to-FOF people, and will be doing a preference draft in the next couple of weeks, so I thought I'd share some of what I've learned (or think I've learned). Some of this may be confusing, some might be a bit controversial or counter-intuitive, and some may even appear to contradict itself at times, because some things just depend on personal preferences. Feel free to ask for clarification on any of this stuff. This post is written with MP primarily in mind, although the general principles all apply to SP as well, with one key difference, which will be pointed out when I get there. (I also hope that sharing some of these principles doesn't come back to bite me like a big dog. WOOF!)
POSITION EMPHASIS
Quote:
1. To emphasize a particular position more than normal, move the slider to the right. Yes, this may seem elementary to some, but a certain Maassluis-dwelling experienced FOFer was still struggling a bit with this concept as recently as a few days ago. Think of the Position Emphasis sliders as a number line: the farther to the right you move a slider, the more emphasis is placed on that position.2. Pay attention to the help file: the sliders are MODIFIERS to drafting strategy, NOT absolutes. This is the part where people really seem to get confused, and even claim that the feature doesn't work properly. The best way I know to describe this it seems that every player in the draft pool is given a value, and each position group has a different constant that multiplies the importance of that given position. (For those who used gstelmack's Draft Analyzer for FOF2K4, think of the positional constants in it.) Maybe a QB's ratings are multiplied by, say, 1.25, a safety's by, say, .85, or whatever. Obviously, I don't know the exacts here. However, what I can say with near-certainty is that what happens is that the baseline constants for each position are modified by the slider settings. In other words, if a QB starts with a 1.25, and you set the slider up to 9, maybe that translates to 1.4 or so. Please understand this point, though: pushing a slider high for a given position does NOT assure that that position will be drafted in the first or second round of the preference draft, especially if you push other positions high as well. That's the point that gets missed a LOT. Let me give you an example from the draft pool of a test league: ![]() Let's say that you set your sliders with QBs as the highest-emphasis position, at 75, and DL second-highest, at 70, and got the draft pool above. You get pretty lucky, and get the #3 overall pick. However, QB Orlando Foley goes with the #1 overall, and the second-best QB, (who is rated 74/74) gets picked #2. It's your pick. The best QB left is A.J. Mattison, rated 69/69, and in his 13th season, and the AI has to choose between him versus a 93/93 DT, or a 90/90 DE. From what I can tell, the calculation (leaving out the modifiers for youth, loyalty and whatnot for now) is going to look something like this: A.J.Mattisondraftrating= 69*(QBmodifierconstant*75*modifieremphasisconstant) KennethWaltersdraftrating=93*(DTmodifierconstant*70*modifieremphasisconstant) The second variable, called modifieremphasisconstant for these purposes, is the number that globally defines how much the impact the sliders have. If the equations confuse you, don't worry about it, the bottom line is this: if you have your DL value high, and QB only a little higher, you're getting Kenneth Walters in the first round, not A.J. Mattison. Now, after the first round is where it gets REALLY interesting (and where people really get pissed off because they don't understand what is going on). In this particular draft pool, there are only 8 QBs with current ratings above 50, and only three others outside that list with high future potential. It is VERY reasonable to assume that by the time your pick comes up in the second round, all 11 of the better QBs will already be gone. Let's assume that you had the forethought to go after some receivers to help your hoped-for stud QB, and set that slider up to 60. There are 11 WRs rated 60 or better current, in this pool, and also WRs rated 59/82, 54/76, 54/80, 51/70, 53/69, 45/76 and 50/70. Point being, odds are pretty good that one of those 18 guys WILL be available when your 2nd-round pick comes up (and that the top 11 QBs are all gone). The AI is then facing the decision of drafting the next-best QB, 48/48 K.C Tayoun, or a WR with ratings in the 60s or 70s. There's a decent chance that it takes the WR in that instance, and then the QB pool gets thinned even more. The bottom line of this train of thought is this: if you absolutely want to get a player at a certain position early in the draft, then emphasize that position MUCH more highly than any other, but doing so is a VERY risky and pretty bad strategy, imho. Because you don't know where you're going to pick, or how thin the pool will be at a given position, your best bet is to emphasize all position groups that are important to you, and let the chips fall where they may. 3. If you choose the right settings elsewhere, you can easily get away with going quite low on some positions. When doing a preference draft, it is crucial to remember that the ratings are distributed logarithmically. There are a whole bunch of guys out there rated from the upper 30s to low 50s who can be decent starters. Don't think that if you set the DL down to 20 that you'll be starting a bunch of 20/20 players. If you want to build your team a particular way, say with very good linebackers and DBs, and can stomach a mediocre DL, then my advice would be to go 0-75-75 on those three settings (and borrow some additional points for your LBs and DBs from the kickers and from somewhere on offense), as opposed to 40-55-55 or something like that. The former will usually get you what you're after. The latter makes it too dependent on who is available when it comes your time to pick. 4. Make sure to think through what position groups need other position groups to do well in order to function well.
ADDITIONAL TRAITS
RESERVES<<<>>>STARTERS Quote:
POTENTIAL<<<>>>EXPERIENCE Quote:
LOYALTY Quote:
RUN DEFENSE<<<>>>PASS DEFENSE Quote:
RUN BLOCKING<<<>>>PASS BLOCKING Quote:
FAN POPULARITY Quote:
PUTTING IT ALL TOGETHER
I hesitate to even post this for a couple of reasons, but here are the ones I used for the Super League preference draft, and the type of team that resulted from it: My roster strength ratings.... QB: 69 (4th in the league) RB: 34 (21st in the league, but starter is an Avg/Good rookie) FB: 93 (2nd) TE: 100 (1st) WR: 100 (1st) C: 73 (7th) G: 54 (12th) T: 35 (22nd) P: 100 (1st) K: 12 (28th) DE: 75 (4th) DT: 53 (11th) ILB: 72 (8th) OLB: 45 (20th) CB: 48 (15th) S: 43 (20th) So the offense looks very strong, as would be expected from the slider settings I chose, but what is probably surprising is my defense looking pretty decent. It's because while other teams were drafting 23/60 defensive players, the AI was drafting 43/43 ones for me, based on my slider settings. Indeed, 7 of my 11 defensive starters have current ratings ranging from 37-49. Three are above that range, and only one, a 32/50 FS drafted in Round 20, is below it. Now, the other reason I hesitated to post my exact slider settings is that if EVERYONE starts choosing the exact sliders I have pictured here (or ones close to it), your team will look vastly different from mine. The results of MP slider choosing are very much dependent on what is chosen by others. My Super League defense is quite a bit better than the ones I was getting during my SP testing, I presume because the AI seems to draft more flatly. Several humans in the Super League obviously made the mistake (in my opinion) of heavily emphasizing youth. Division rival Hartford has 39 rookies on its 60-man roster, and a total of 42 players with current rating below 30, and they're not even the worst team in the league. There are a total of 10 teams in the Super League with an average age less than 24.0. (Mine is 26.9, second-highest in the league.)
__________________
The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'! |
|||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Of no particular interest
|
Very simple a caveman can do it.
![]() Seriously though, I did a test of this, and your sliders are somewhat similar to my setup. I did put a little less on RB, more on OL and pass blocking. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
H.S. Freshman Team
Join Date: Sep 2006
|
Very informative
. Thanks for sharing SkyDog |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Greensboro, NC
|
One thing to add would be that you MIGHT even get 93/93 DT Kenneth Walters over 80/80 QB Orlando Foley.
__________________
The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'! |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
High School JV
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Natick, MA
|
This is fascinating, SkyDog. I've been playing around with the preference and the complete drafts, usually using the 1970 roster base, sometimes Y's 2006 base. What I've found is the key to building a dynasty (I'm not interested in a quick-hit Bowl win or two - I want 3/5, 5/10 or something like that !) is what happens in the first 2-3 years AFTER the draft. Any draft strategy and any finite draft will leave you with an initial roster that is sub-optimum and needs improvement to reach dynasty level. I have not done any controlled studies, but I think I see a pattern where top-level DLs and OLs are darn hard to grab post-draft, so I try to lay them in at draft time, and tilt toward youth (e.g. reserves over starters) a little more than you did. Certainly serviceable DBs, LBs and WRs can be picked up in later drafts or FA - a star QB or RB is far tougher to find and largely a matter of luck. I have no MP experience, so I don't know how those competitive pressures alter the player acquisition landscape in the first few years, but I strongly urge you to consider post-draft roster supplementing as part of your overall draft approach.
Last edited by WebEwbank : 12-25-2006 at 06:14 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Anyone who's in the mood to share experience here have a comment on that? There are (obviously) separate sliders for youth/experience and starters/reserves... but do they seem to work together? I'm with Ben from above and generally have tilted way toward "starters" but if you really want a young team do you put off that goal by puching for starters over reserves? Last edited by QuikSand : 12-25-2006 at 07:23 AM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Syracuse, NY
|
Quote:
In the WAFL I maxed starters and maxed youth and I got a young team that will be a force in a season or two. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Mascot
Join Date: Sep 2006
|
Thank, as a new owner in OSFL this will really help.
__________________
SLOP: Las Vegas Aces |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Greensboro, NC
|
Good. The existence of the OSFL heavily motivated me to do this.
__________________
The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'! |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Syracuse, NY
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
|
High School JV
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Natick, MA
|
Naturally.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Pro Rookie
Join Date: Jan 2006
|
With regards to starters-reserves, there's a very good reason to set this to high on reserves. The argument being that you would rather have the 22 best players available (using your own positional ratings), rather than the 22 players who best fit in all the positions. It depends if you want to trade a lot or not. If you like to trade and think that you're good at it then it might be worthwhile sliding that towards "reserves".
And I still disagree about potential. I think you have a much better chance of getting a player who will live up to his potential in the preference draft rather than the amateur drafts later. Of course you have to be worried that the AI will pick a load of rookie stiffs for you, so I wouldn't max out potential. However going with potential means that your team is going to have great cohesion at a later stage, even if not all the players pan out. Unless you're a hotshot drafter (and I doubt even Jim will be in this game - I'd like to check IHOF to see how he does draft) then getting youth in the preference draft is a far safer route for the first 6 years or so than looking for rejuvenation through the amateur drafts. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |
|
Awaiting Further Instructions...
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Macungie, PA
|
Quote:
I was Hartford and that is exactly what I did. I emphasized Future potential thinking that my first few years would be a wash and, in hindsight, that isn't the way to go in MP. This is a great post and I will use this info for the upcoming PrefDraft for SHIBA.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
n00b
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Nashville
|
Excellent post. I bookmarked it and if I can ever find a league I'll be sure to reference it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
|
H.S. Freshman Team
Join Date: Jan 2007
|
I agree with TitansGuru on this
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 |
|
High School Varsity
Join Date: Jan 2007
|
Eyes Pop Out of Head
That was awesome to read. I now know I need to buy this game.
![]() |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|