Snakebitten: A Real-Time MP FOF thread

[QuikSand]

It has been quite some time since I fiddled with gameplanning very much, but I have been doing a bit, which may have some application for this league, in time.

Over in the IHOF, I have a team that (shocked look here) is very high chemistry and pretty high cohesion. Yeah, I know, right?

Anyway...I have a guy on that team who's the sort i like to keep around, but really don't know what to do with: WR Rusty Hojnacki

He's a guy we grabbed at the end of his rookie year, as a free agent (I guess we missed the playoffs that season, and had a free shot at some young'ns). Anyway now he's a 10th year guy, has big cohesion with us, a 94 personality fit, and can play special teams. So, that's all good. He cannot, however, seem to do much of anything in terms of "playing wide receiver." What use is this guy?

He's obviously good for chem, regardless. But the special teams and cohesion stuff only tips the scales if he's active. So, ST sure, but do we really want to put him onto the field at receiver just to boost unit cohesion? probably not, right?

Okay, revelation time. What about setting up a formation (or two) where one receiver slot is basically just not going to get targets? That was, I could set up Rusty as the R (or whatever), he'd be on the field and I'd get that big 10-year cohesion bonus, but wouldn't have to worry about seeing a gamelog with that stiff getting 6 targets for 1 catch and 7 yards. Now, that seems interesting... could help keep my legit WRs fresh, too.

I'm going to give it a shot in the IHOF, with this guy, and see if it manages to connect properly. I'm intrigued...

[QuikSand]

Two fun things I noticed on Rusty's player page above...

-he actually has been targeted 3 times in his career, and has 2 catches for 74 yards... not bad for an apparent hobo

-looks like we had to overcome an obvious "let's go fuck around with the chemistry guy" contract offer, obviously full of smoke, from one of the usual suspects... I just need to be aware of that sort of thing playing the way I do

[QuikSand]

Late free agency, in one swoop:

Most importantly, whew. Apparently I never sent in my file for early FA 9-12, and we have now dodged the two bullets I created by doing so. No holdouts, and we re-upped with DE Tyronne Baither. He's a young high-ST high-chem guy who wanted a decent offer in early free agency. I had succumbed to his demands, but neglected to send in that file... so he became an open free agent. Fortunately, he can't really "play football" so nobody else was interested, and he's back for a 2yr ending-with-minsal deal.

Past that, we landed a few more camp bodies. BEL Transactions page

Notable here:

Why pay LB Shockey a serious one year deal? He's already got starts to make his good affinity active. And he'll be a RFA next year after a season on our bench. That's why. Maybe he's a long term asset, but a young guy with a strong affinity who doesn't need to be force-fed starts? Yes, please.

Among the rookies, I think T Borelli is the most interesting. My scout makes that Run Blocking bar at 19/96. Who knows what this guy actually is, maybe nothing. If that bar looks shaky, then we won't bother with him - he's not a serious chemistry asset, w/personality only 12. But if that looks legit, he could be our C of the future.

[QuikSand]

Ackshually, WR Trey Pote will get a legitimate look in camp. He's a guy I likely would have drafted in round 4 or so - return skills, special teams, and a good chem fit. We'll see how he looks after preseason, but I reckon he survives the cutdown to 60 at least.

[QuikSand]

Ok, thread keeps humming along, for better or for worse.

Training Camp in the bag. The BELCo website always has a list of "dandies" and "duds" at this point - DE Alec Humphrey is near the top of the dandies list, that's really good news, I was getting fearful we blew that pick... so maybe not. And THREE of our undrafted rookies made the list, also. How bout that.

So, we might end up with a top-half rookie class despite trading down to only three early picks. Seriously, this has to be something I consider doing all the damned time. My strike rate with later picks is just not good enough to merit staying there regularly. Maybe I try again in a season or two to deal away my 2-3-5-6-7 for three seasons... keeping the 4th rounder for specialists and intriguing reaches, that sort of thing. Will definitely consider.

[QuikSand]

Oh, awesome. The RB I grabbed after the draft, and who shows up as a "dandy" is a red flag guy. I can't see that lasting here... is there likely any market for a guy like that next offseason? Dubious at best. He likely gets cut. Damn.

[QuikSand]

Cut down to 60... some intrigue here as we have some younger players I'd like to get to preseason. So, we'll slide back into 2112 thinking now - some of these cuts are long-term rather than short-term.

Like... we currently have 14 guys signed on the OL. Really, Quik? Really? JT Vinci is a pass-blocking center (not my fave combo) in his 7th year and a great chem fit... but would he be a starter in 2112? Even if/when Castillo disintegrates or quits, I doubt I'd start Vinci - I just prefer a road grader there. So, despite being a signing I liked at the time, he might not even make it to preseason.

Chemistry will be my guide here, we have locked in LT Joey Dotson as our leader, but he might not even start anytime soon - if UDFA Booker bumps in camp like I think, he might get the start at LT. G is solid with three guys I like (Foreman supposed to be the stud, Darby and Turnbull solid), and at C we have current Stud Ezekiel Castillo backed up by promising run blockers Guthrie and Borelli, both of whom would need starts to click). That's 9 guys, more than I typically would carry.

At WR/TE, my hopes of moving a young C over to TE to become the group leader have been dashed - so I might end up with a 2/3 guy with only 80 personality taking the league mid-season. Less than ideal. but best I can do here, I fear.

Given my previous deep dive into special teams, I'm now looking again at all these guys with a nice-looking 6- or 70 there, and wondering if I should be considering that an actual asset. If I am only going to encourage 10-11 active players, then the cutoff on this team (stocked with ST studs) is going to be 80 or more. So, not much diff between 65 and 5. Will factor that in - does that leave a young WR like Vecchio on the bubble? He looks good in the surface... 90 personality and 69/74 special teams. But if he end up inactive... no harm done, but we wouldn't even put him on the field, he might as well not have those non-zero bars. Don't know for sure. WR Collin Nelson same - signed as a 5th year guy, 51 pers and 79 ST, seemed great. Now... useless?

Okay, not a ton of drama... but we're down to 60, and preseason ought to be pretty interesting for a few of these young guys. Who earns "starts" this year to lock in a 2112 roster spot?

[Chas in Cinti]

Digging the approach and the depth of analysis... thanks for continuing to share...

[tzach]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Okay, revelation time. What about setting up a formation (or two) where one receiver slot is basically just not going to get targets? That was, I could set up Rusty as the R (or whatever), he'd be on the field and I'd get that big 10-year cohesion bonus, but wouldn't have to worry about seeing a gamelog with that stiff getting 6 targets for 1 catch and 7 yards. Now, that seems interesting... could help keep my legit WRs fresh, too.

I'm going to give it a shot in the IHOF, with this guy, and see if it manages to connect properly. I'm intrigued...

very good points, quik. i've used this approach in IHOF with TOR in 2074-2078, when i didn't have 3 receivers. you don't need to go to no targets -- i think an optimal number of targets for a 30-rated slot WR with lowish route running is around 50-60 per season, so 3-4 per game. i currently use this approach with TEs in IHOF.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by tzach

very good points, quik. i've used this approach in IHOF with TOR in 2074-2078, when i didn't have 3 receivers. you don't need to go to no targets -- i think an optimal number of targets for a 30-rated slot WR with lowish route running is around 50-60 per season, so 3-4 per game. i currently use this approach with TEs in IHOF.

So, agreed on a low-RR guy with some other talents. That's more or less my plan this year for [url=http://gml.fof-belco.com/playercard.php?playerid=81833]Bernal[/url.] Here, however, I'm talking about a complete no-talent payer - whose only merit is solid special teams and his impressive staying power on the roster. For him, I think 50 targets would be silly... I'd rather he ended up with 5.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by Chas in Cinti

Digging the approach and the depth of analysis... thanks for continuing to share...

all for you, my man

[QuikSand]

Cutting down to 53 now.

A pure 2112 approach dictates that we release Jimmy Mc. He is not good enough to attract a trade offer. He wants to be paid $40m/yr after a mediocre starting season, so it looks like at most he'd stay with us this season and next. And he's 3rd best in affinities at the QB position. I'm not starting with that, but it's in play. Sadly.

The Turk visits:
9th yr FB Erric Stai - ratings tumbled, he's not a 2112 guy anyhow
RFA WR Trey Pote - 2 personality does him in, not the answer at KR
10th yr DE Owen McCleon, fading and now have better chem leader
RFA LB Jose Jones - just not good enough to push into starts
...that was pretty easy, down to 56...
RFA DE Scott Lynn - just not enough starts to go around for meh pass rushers
6th yr LB Jeffrey Dandron - usable guy, but LB6 without ST, nope
...ugh...Jimmy Mc? Eat $60m in dead cap hit and cut CB Everett?
2nd yr CB Kent Stapleton - have another PR, easier to get his chem working

Okay, then. The first play of each game is going to look like a freak show, but the 2112 team is starting to come together. I'm going to start rookie free agent Willie Booker at left tackle - that's not an important position, right? Sadly, RT Gage Peterson faded in preseason, so we're even worse off at OT than I had expected. Might be our #1 need, at least one build-around tackle.

Jimmy Mc stays, so does CB Everett. Everett will play, Jimmy will watch.

So, this year... probably the same ballpark as last year, I'd think. I believe Teddy is a better skills fit for this team, so we might be able to churn out a 90-90 passer rating from him on 4200 yards or so. Weydahl ought to get a lot of looks. I'll try to keep the rookie WR in the mix, too, as well as Bernal here and there. Trying to use players wisely, I really feel the lack of a true GD stud - all my top receivers are more BPR types, a bit of a mismatch.

We'll hope for 10 wins, but won't be shocked if it's 8.

[QuikSand]

Regular season in the books.

Season Stats

Hmmm, what went wrong? -8 on turnovers, that's not great. Running game surprisingly anemic - what happened? Pass defense was not great - team YPA allowed was 6.41, mid-league. But many of our numbers seem to suggest a 9 or 10 win team to me, not an underwater finish like 7-9.

GOOD SEASONS
QB Teddy Farrell, over 5K yards and pretty efficient (not our turnover problem)
WR Victor Lester, solid WR1 numbers, 9.5 ypt on 160 targets, well done
PR Ramon Matthews, 19.2 average on punt returns, yessssssss
G Donald Foreman, anchors the OL with 40% KRBs and only 1 sack allowed
LB Jermaine Tanner, 115 tackles and holds down the inside (but RunD weak)
DE A McCormick, 13 sacks, good on ya fella
CB Riley Douglass, 84.5 PD% whoa, playing all CB, great season
CB Donnell Small, 81.8 PD% as rookie, very promising for us

BAD SEASONS
WR F Vecchio - not his fault, just got too many targets (116 for 7.4 ypt)
The defense - porous against the run, not enough turnovers, period


Okay, not panicked. Sadly, we don't own our own draft pick next year, as I would have been an earlier one than I might have guessed. We have the Cincinnati pick, which looks like it's somewhere in the 11-13 range, so we ought to land a quality addition there. The JAX 2nd will be 50th or so. That's our whole draft.

[Izulde]

What positions do you consider most important for high Run Defense bars in this edition of the engine? I'm presuming that will be your area of highest priority in the draft and/or FA, given the season's results.

[QuikSand]

To be totally fair, I pretty much ignore run defense. I feel this game principally rewards the passing game, so I prefer not to invest a lot into the running game in any direction. I always end up with filler-caliber LB who are pretty good in Run D and weak in coverage (mainly zone) and I hide them inside, especially at WILB. But overall, I just gather big bars of all types... Run D and the related things like Play Diagnosis and so forth are all secondary in my thinking.

So, I'm the wrong guy to ask. And no, fixing my run defense is not a high priority. That's not how you win in FOF.

[QuikSand]

What intrigues me the most with the running game is how damned fickle it seems to be. Last two seasons - same two RBs (admittedly no close attention to who is playing in what setup), 95% the same gameplan, and most of the same offensive line:

RB Harden 2109: 111-424, 3.82 ypc, 3 TD
RB Harden 2108: 120-699, 5.83 ypc, 7 TD

RB Lindsay 2109: 141-630, 4.47 ypc, 2TD
RB Lindsay 2108: 156-557, 3.57 ypc, 3TD

Team KRB% 2109: 32.9 (avg 35.9)
Team KRB% 2108: 30.6 (avg 33.8)

So, it's certainly possible that the roles the two backs were in changed, or even flipped... I just don't recall paying much attention to it either year. But Harden's 5.8 had me thinking maybe he is the right answer for us long term, and now I'm thinking he's a cut. Beats me whether either of these guys is actually a "good player."

[QuikSand]

Were the Special Teams... Special?

Kick Returns (rank, average)
2107: 27.2 (3rd, 23.4)
2108: 25.8 (11th, 23.7)
2109: 26.0 (9th, 23.8)

Punt Returns (rank, average)
2107: 9.1 (15th, 9.1)
2108: 15.5 (3rd, 9.5)
2109: 19.2 (2nd, 10.2)

Kick Returns Allowed (rank, average)
2107: 19.7 (2nd, 23.4)
2108: 18.9 (1st, 23.7)
2109: 21.4 (4th, 23.8)

Punt Returns allowed (rank, average)
2107: 3.4 (1st!, 9.1)
2108: 7.5 (t4th, 9.5)
2109: 9.4 (12th, 10.2)

So... what jumps out is the punt return allowed number from 2017. What did we do so much better then? BETTER PUNTER, DUMBASS. Cochrane was pretty good... (although not really great in hang time, which seems like it would connect most to return average) and we have gone cheap there since he left. Carolina isn't league best there (they're right there with us) so he's not the magic ingredient... but he has to be part of it. So... perhaps we need to look at the punter position.

(whisper: we are already looking at it)

[tzach]

i love this thread -- have you given up on the 2 TE offense? i'm surprised to see your TE2 with only 3 targets

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by tzach

i love this thread -- have you given up on the 2 TE offense? i'm surprised to see your TE2 with only 3 targets

Honestly, I love this thread too now, wtf

No, the TE2 vanishing act was just a mistake on my part. Had I properly slotted him, he would have had about 60-70 targets... I just failed to double check my assignments, and I left Weydahl in all the prime receiving TE slots in the offense. (I use the T position in one setup, and in prior years, the default setting was to slot Weydahl as the Y and Carr as the T... for some reason that didn't happen this year and I missed it)

Not sure what balance I will be shooting for next season, though... with a second WR of quality on the roster, I feel like I have the diversity of targets to get back to a fully-featured offense. Going to give some thought about moving even further into the 2019 Ravens mindset of using TEs for lots of the underneath work, and wideouts for downfield stuff. I really don't have a perfect slot receiver on this team, but my tight ends could easily become the targets for those plays, even more than they are already. Don't want to bork the hidden chutes and ladders system, though.

[QuikSand]

So, Ben's Atlanta team bests an AVAILABLE team from the AFC to retain human dominance. That's fun, sorry to Jeremessiah's Chefs (great googly moogly) who had a great regular season but got beaten at the wrong time.

We have no retirements... hooray.

One personnel note... I always go out and splash around in the free agent market once my team is eliminated. This year we may have uncovered a relative gem that way:

Punter EdFred

If hang time is a big deal, then perhaps this guy is my ticket to getting a notch or two better in our return game. We'll see - but grabbing a free agent and locking him in as restricted for this season seems like a no brainer. He's likely better than what I could get after the draft this season - but I will take a look at what a fat one year deal might bring us, assuming I have cap space to work with.

[QuikSand]

Another interesting and noteworthy twist here - CB Douglas has seized the group leadership away from CB Everett, so this year we will be all happied up, finally. There's a chance that Everett will re-sign fairly affordably (after a couple seasons of limited field time), and I'll have to decide whether the combination of talent and cohesion is worth going without any chemistry on that roster slot. So, kinda glad I didn't cut him last year - it's nice to have this option, at least. He's still a CB1/CB2 quality player, imo.

[QuikSand]

I'm working on my grid of current/2112 players (it's starting to converge)... but for now, here's my thinking on the ordered needs for this team:

LT
EDGE
RBserious
WR slot
KRstud
studP
studK

Without digging into the FA class, I think the most intriguing thing for us will be the pass rush. Locked in, with my mental letter grades, I have McCormick (B), Humphrey (C+), Whiting (C), and DT Calhoun (A-). To make my defense work properly, I feel liek I need to add another guy of serious caliber. Tuholski is a 10th year free agent... if he re-signed, we'd likely start him and get the foll chem/coh combo to augment his presumably waning talent. Probably our best move, up until he retires or just bottoms out.

If there's a good fit OT for us with pick 1.10, that seems like the obvious play for us. A young stud pass rusher would be the most likely thing to move me off that path. And if the stars don't align for us at the right position in the rookie class, a trade down to pick up a couple rotation-caliber picks could be in the cards, too.

[QuikSand]

The free agent class doesn't look like a great batch for our needs. Had been hoping there might be a 5th year stud OL for us... well, the studs are there, but none fit our scheme, and I'm not paying a premium for anyone other than an ideal fit.

Bad luck for us, the guys out there who would be great fits happen to be at positions where I'm not really looking to spend a ton of new money - TE, DB. So, I'll weigh my options (can't see demands yet, we're only at the stupid stage one) but it could be another offseason of mostly biding our time and retaining guys we already have in the fold.

[QuikSand]

Okay head count, as we start the big phase, FA 1:2

47 player signed
05 RFAs definitely being re-signed (S Thomas, LB Shockey, C Borrelli, FB Shepherd, P Frederick)
02 draft picks
---
54 How bout that we're already home!

Roster is already legal, so we don't have any must-do moves. Pretty easy setup.

$141m in cap space is about 22% of the total, enough to work with
$20m to extend C Castillo (likely)
$30m to extend LB Randolph (definitely)
$10m to extend S McGee (likely)
...that gets us to more like $80m to spend, and we know we have more extensions down the road to keep the group together. That's more like our working figure for now... and Teddy Tightends will be looking for $40m/yr next season (he's at $6m today).

CB Gabe Everett will either come off the books next year (or this year) or possibly extend at around $10m/yr after this season. Again, a debate about cohesion + talent versus pure chemistry, where he's now neutral. Also a tough call on CB Metzenbaum, he's fading and unlikely to be important to us by 2112... so we... cut him? Maybe.

QB Jimmy Mc, off a bench season, would extend at $10m a year, a shade below his price today. Ummm... maybe? If Teddy retires, JimmyMc would be a good fit with huge cohesion and experience. Worth carrying a mid-sized salary forever? Dunno.

[QuikSand]

Hmm, Teddy won't even cap out this year, so the bump to big money could happen as soon as this offseason if he holds out, which we definitely cannot rule out.

[QuikSand]

First easy take-away...it would be really tough for us to carry DE Tuholski. He's a quality starter right now, but he's a 10th year guy. 96 personality makes him a wonderful fit for us short term, but he wants a 3yr deal at $30 per. I don't see how we can swing it. If I knew he'd still be good enough to play for 2112-13-14 then maybe... but without that sense, we likely just cannot afford him.

Basically, I know that I will have a number of marginal active/starting players who will want real money beyond their ordinary worth. And given this push for cohesion, I will want to pay them. But to make it work by the target year(s) I likely will have to economize on what I spend on any player who is not on the active roster and on the field a lot. Inactive players will need to be minsal or really close to it. I won't have the luxury of paying guys to be pleasant, I fear.

Anyway, Tuholski wants a stage 2 deal, I expect I will sit it out and watch him get paid by AVAILABLE.

[QuikSand]

This offseason sucks already. No great fits for the draft, at all. Free agency much the same. Really disappointing.

[QuikSand]

Went in to re-do my stage file, trying to afford DE Tuholski. I don't see how to do it, but that guy remains super-productive.

Ramon, cast your eyes upon him

A 12.5 PR% is unreal. 11 sacks on 271 pass plays... same. He's a damned 96 personality, 10 year cohesion guy who is still flat out balling.

The numbers don't work, especially if he retires after this year or next... but if he's even a 70-rated PR Tech guy in 2112, he'd be a monster asset for us.

Trying to find the witchcraft to keep him around.

[QuikSand]

Draft tool posted up, and AI teams make the first 7 picks. Bad news for us - the two great fit players for us are both off the board already. Big time (but low developed) C and a max-bars OLB... neither exactly need areas, but both look like potential stud players.

So...I sit at 10, and am looking at either a quality non-affinity player, or else a significant reach. Have two candidates for the latter, both should be fine, but look more like the caliber I expect from a pick in the 20s than top ten. Damn, damn, damn... just bad luck with the horoscopes here.

[QuikSand]

Well, the results of the first and biggest FA stage are in, and the results are mixed. At one point, this outcome was precisely what I desired. Then I flipped. Now, I'm a bit disappointed.

Ramon Tuholski is gone. Not to AVAILABLE, but to Atlanta, the champs. Dammit. Ben definitely thinks human GMs undervalue older players, and he likely had cap space to make this move - he lands Tuholski for 3yrs, $108.0M (Bonus: $75.0M. Salary: $11.0M, $11.0M, $11.0M.) I put in a bonus-heavy bid at $22m per year... likely wouldn't even have beaten out the AVAILABLE bids. So... not really even close. So it goes. Initially my instinct was to just let him walk, then I talked myself into him as important for 2010-11-12 if not 2013-14-15. Mooted now. He gone.

What's the upside here? Shiny new DB Eugene Slechta. He lined up at safety thus far, but at 190 lbs and maxed-out bump skills, I see him as a CB for us. His signing probably means we can let both CB Metzenbaum and Everett walk - our CB1/2 pair of the future is likely Shlechta/Small in whatever order, with the nickel and dime slots filled out by our other happy campers. That should be very solid, talent-wise, and every single guy will be on board for chemistry.

Riley Douglas now freely moves over to start at SS, where his 88 RunD and max Zone D should make him a serious force, as well as the chem lead. Austin and (probably) McGee remain in our long term plans as rotation-caliber safeties. I like it.

Now... if I do end up using my 2nd round pick in this draft, it's possible I still go DB for lack of stronger options. But I'm hoping that isn't our situation.

[QuikSand]

For what it's worth... the draft is sitting at 1.9, I pick at 1.10. The best player available, is not a match for chemistry, but looks like a total monster at a need position for us. It will be hard to reach for a god fit decent player over a potential superstar type. I'll keep noodling on it, but I expect to break my chem vow here unless the guy gets snapped up.

[QuikSand]

Mister wonderful, a nearly maxed-out LB, is there for me at pick 10. We really could use a do-it-all LB, I've been planning to just slot Jay James as our WLB long term, but a stud there would be sweet. Actually, I'd move Randolph to Will and play the rookie at Sam, most likely.

[QuikSand]

I couldn't resist

[Chas in Cinti]

wow...

[QuikSand]

Yeah, if the unasked question was "how good does a guy need to look to get picked without an affinity?" then he's the answer to that question, apparently.

I had an offer of a pick in the late-ish 1st plus that team's 1st next year for him (for the pick, but that owner also wanted this guy)... I turned it down. My Plan B guy was a decent slot-style WR who went at pick 13 - I was worried I was really reaching to take him at 10, but perhaps not.

So... I'll just adjust my thinking around this cat. I do wonder why the AI teams all skipped him... he was #3 overall on the in-game big board, he's pretty highly developed... not sure if there's a rad flag in his combines, I didn't see one. Anyway, he's in.

[QuikSand]

Our one FA signing this stage could be consequential. G Rex Drake isn't an apparent superstar - a good run blocking lineman is okay, but not a build-around thing. However, he could take the leadership role from our current OL leader, T Joey Dotson, who is currently pissed off about playing time. So...I had been planning to play Dotson this year to get him happy again.

If we switch to Drake, some dominoes fall. He's a 4-5, Dotson is a 2-3. My core guys (C Castillo, G Foreman, G Darby) are all in the 6-7 group and click with either leader. However, T Booker and G Turnbull are 4-5 guys...and would unclick with Drake in the lead seat. Worth it? Booker is a mediocre guy, a T3 caliber player on a good team... but we're perilously thin at T already. So, that's the big weakness here. With what we have on hand right now, my thinking on the OL would be:

2110
LT Dotson - LG Foreman - C Castillo - RG Drake/Darby - RT Peterson
Depth: Aydelotte? 96, Keith? 89, Borrelli 12

2112+
LT Foreman/Dotson - LG Foreman/Drake - C Castillo/Borrelli - RG Drake/Darby - RT Peterson?
Depth: ???

So... right now the plan at LT might indeed be to start our young up-and-coming LG Foreman. He's rated a 5 in the position (only an 8 at LG), and a formal position switch is at only 78%, for what that's worth. Using Dotson and Booker forever and just letting the rack up cohesion bonus isn't absurd, so that's in play too.

The deal with Drake is fully team-friendly, so we deliberately have options there.

[QuikSand]

Side note on Mr. Wonderful... one comment in the draft thread was that he is old. I will confess that I have never, ever even weighted player age in the slightest measure when drafting. Maybe I am indeed missing something. I can't speak with authority there... if that means he might fade in year 9 instead of year 11 or something like that, I'm simply not going to worry about that when selecting him. If it's some backdoor insight into the way the player was coded or masked, then maybe this will be instructive for me. The game has facets like that, I don't have any good explanation for why I have never watched rookie age before.

[QuikSand]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

I do wonder why the AI teams all skipped him... he was #3 overall on the in-game big board, he's pretty highly developed... not sure if there's a red flag in his combines, I didn't see one. Anyway, he's in.

Okay, looked back. He's a combine skipper. No red flags, and insufficient grounds for the AI to pick him, Ben has confirmed. So... I'm not worried any more. He only had to slip past a couple of human teams to make it to pick 10, not a mini-army of BenBots.

[QuikSand]

We have one more draft pick this year, in the late 2nd round. At this point, it would be nice to land one more chemistry-fit defensive player, someone good enough to get starts.

The rookie class simply doesn't have the perfect-fit players I might like to land here: a usable RB/WR/DB with great return skills...a slot-worthy WR good enough to get targets away from my TE group...a startable pass rusher.

I will look at the OL candidates, maybe someone in the 2-3 group escaped my gaze when I did my early look-through... but I don't have any in really in my sights at the moment.

So... RB, DE, OT, DB all possible here.

[QuikSand]

Roster headcount:
53 signed
02 draft picks coming in
05 guys with top offer pending

So, cutdowns will include:
a punter, we have two
older CB/s? as we sort out that position
OL who don't fit the chem scheme (1-2)
...QB Jimmy Mc?
and likely a ratings bomb or two

[Pyser]

Originally Posted by QuikSand

Side note on Mr. Wonderful... one comment in the draft thread was that he is old. I will confess that I have never, ever even weighted player age in the slightest measure when drafting. Maybe I am indeed missing something. I can't speak with authority there... if that means he might fade in year 9 instead of year 11 or something like that, I'm simply not going to worry about that when selecting him. If it's some backdoor insight into the way the player was coded or masked, then maybe this will be instructive for me. The game has facets like that, I don't have any good explanation for why I have never watched rookie age before.

Ha. It's like knocking the stud QB's who cant kick-hold (or at least in previous versions). There's nothing to knock on that dude.

I do wish the game had way less 24-25 year old rookies though.

[QuikSand]

Second round, got decent value and actually targeted a need spot - hopefully this guy develops into a rotation-worthy pass DE, and if that special teams bar remains maxed out he'll be a lovely fit.

DE Ethan Anthony

[QuikSand]

I was pretty sure DE Anthony would go off the board before my pick - had been fully expecting to just grab a meh OL there, like a tackle of the same caliber as the guys I already have. So, this was a lucky turn, I think. And, it likely gives Joey Dotson a lane to not only start this year, but potentially to lock in as a long term starter. If Willie Booker is going to get bounced for lack of an affinity, that leaves Dotson as our most talented true tackle. Given his cohesion/chemistry edge, he might just be "the guy" for us after all.

[QuikSand]

In free agency, a couple of good signings.

FB Jackson Lusignan re-upped, on an affordable deal that ends with him clicking back down to the minsal range. That's good - he's in our long term plans, I probably shouldn't have exposed him to free agency that way, he's a high chemistry special teams standout and we're willing to overlook that he can't block a lick.

LB Riddick Hanson was cut after 3 seasons with an AI team, and he's signed up with us. Nothing super special, but good enough to take the field, he already has his starts to click in chemistry, and he'd be good enough to play special teams on most teams (79). Personality only 38, so we'll see if he's a guy we keep around after these next two years - but for now, a solid fit.

[QuikSand]

Incidentally...I am, with this nutty 2112 concept, having more fun with this damned team than anything I have done in MP FOF, possibly ever. I suspect it's going to lead to frustration (cap problems, due to feeling I need to retain all these marginal players who start asking for "starter money") but the assembling has been pretty engaging. The joy of finding a young affinity LB who already got his starts for another team is profound in this situation, where on most of my teams that would be pretty routine.

[QuikSand]

Bubble alert: TE Kaleb Austin

Who's getting cut? Maybe a guy like this.

If he stays, his main advantage is cohesion, right? He's been with us for 6 years, by 2112 it will be 8 years, so he's a plus there.

But cohesion only matters if you're on the field. So, when is this guy going to be on the field in 2112? I have A- and B+ options ahead of this guy who's basically a C+... and each of them will have almost as much cohesion benefit. I don't expect to let either one of them walk into free agency, and this is a zero-injury league.

So, why keep Austin? At the moment, we have a no-talent affinity gimp as TE4 inactive. I could easily just promote him to the active roster, but keep him off the field except for that wacky jumbo package. Weydahl and Carr can definitely handle all our duties, even in our fairly TE-reliant attack.

So, then we look at his personality. He's an affinity but only a milquetoast 32 there. So the one thing he is really contributing - we'd be better off with a minsal youngster who happens to have a 90+ personality. I can manufacture starts for a TE in half a season, no problem.

He's on the bubble.

[QuikSand]

Some more signings... all chemistry-based.

C Kelvin Borrelli
FA Stage 7
signed to a new contract: 2yrs, $5,240,000.

...bit run block potential, has his starts, but low personality

FB D.J. Shepherd
FA Stage 7
signed to a new contract: 2yrs, $5,280,000.

...was my Plan B for FB, now he's Plan B for TE3

FB Erric Stai
FA Stage 8
signed as a free agent: 2yrs, $9,200,000.

...no risk deal with an old friend and good chem fit

FL Ramon Matthews
FA Stage 8
re-signed as an unrestricted free agent

...one year deal with last year's PR w/ 19.2 yard avg (!)

SE Norman Hoover
FA Stage 8
signed as a free agent: 2yrs, $5,240,000.

He's a young 2-3 guy with 77/97 chem - future RB/WR leader?

C Chandler Freeman
FA Stage 9
signed as a free agent: 1yrs, $8,800,000.

Another no-risk option for OL leadership (67/99), RunB only


The RB leadership role is interesting right now. I have a converted long snapper there (52/93) - and my other players I expect to stay want no part of the leadership role (Harden 4th/17, Lindsay 3rd/33, and FB Lusignan 6th/15) - meaning I might be able to slot in this 2nd year cat Hoover there, click him with starts, and have him take over the group. Then, over time, he could become a legit group leader w 97 personality - I like that. My current WR/TE leader is a no-talent 62/80 guy, I'd like to bump up the connections there over time. So, the cheapest and seemingly least important guy here might be the one who matters most, given this silly vision quest I'm undertaking.

[QuikSand]

Renegotiations?

A couple tricky questions here. The big pivot for cap space this year is QB TeddyTightEnds, who really has the leverage to hold us up and become a $30m guy right now. If he doesn't, and I get to put that off one more year... then a couple questions.

CB Everett. I have been talking about cutting/trading him. No trade offers. Cut? Maybe. But if we want to keep him, I could extend him this year and turn this year's 18+30 into 4/50 or so... he'd only cost us $12/yr or so after this season. That makes for a very affordable high quality high cohesion starter. Talent-wise that would make us pretty formidable at DB overall, I think, which I like. Have to decide whether he's a luxury, and perhaps not worth the cap space and the non-affinity compromise.

QB Jimmy Mc. I couldn't pull the trigger last year and cut him. Now, is he a guy we want to keep? He's semi-forgotten he used to start, so instead of asking for $30m+ he only wants $12m/yr. Unlikely I re-up - he could even be cheaper next year.

C Castillo.Ok, this is tough. He's excellent. He's also in his 11th season, and he's 33 years old. If I re-up with him, it will take a lot this year - and I'm buying in for, maybe, two more seasons, right? So, best case he sticks around to 2112 and then we have to turn over the reins to someone else, maybe Guthrie or Borrelli. Ugh.

S Levi McGee. Tricky because he's asking for bigger money than I might have guessed - he wants $21m/yr, and I see him as more of a $10-12m guy. The re-up is the safe play, he's a guy I would like to keep here and on the field... but he's not good enough to play special teams for us. The 88 personality, though, and cohesion...

Honestly, if Teddy doesn't hold out this year... I'll probably just extend him this year anyway, while I have the cap space to give. And Castillo... just unsure what to do there, he's a major talent, hard to let go.

[QuikSand]

Chemistry note... as of right now, if I look at my roster and sort on Chemistry, the "Exceptional Affinity" list carries all the way to and beyond the bottom of the visible page. Whoa.

[QuikSand]

HOLDING OUT

Baltimore Ravens
QB Teddy Farrell
43
43

Baltimore Ravens
S Levi McGee
49
49

yyyyyyyyup