Front Office Football Central  

Go Back   Front Office Football Central > Main Forums > FOF8/TCY Discussion
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read Statistics

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-06-2015, 06:50 PM   #51
garion333
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Near Cleveland
Thanks, Ben. I can finally draft punters properly!

garion333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-06-2015, 07:00 PM   #52
Sharkn20
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by garion333 View Post
Thanks, Ben. I can finally draft punters properly!

Sharkn20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-15-2015, 03:52 AM   #53
sachmo71
The boy who cried Trout
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: TX
is 11.4 broad jump right for running back?
__________________
Consider supporting the Extra Life 2017 charity event! www.extra-life.org/participant/csachnik
sachmo71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2015, 01:20 PM   #54
garion333
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Near Cleveland
It's 114, not 11.4

114 inches = 9 feet, 6 inches
garion333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-16-2015, 03:14 PM   #55
sachmo71
The boy who cried Trout
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: TX
ah crap! thanks garion!
__________________
Consider supporting the Extra Life 2017 charity event! www.extra-life.org/participant/csachnik
sachmo71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-17-2015, 01:33 PM   #56
garion333
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Near Cleveland
Ben, based on the numbers you gave later, here are a few things that seem out of whack from the OP. It should be:

FB
Most Important: Broad Jump (104)
Also: PosDrl (22), Bench (20)
Least: Solecismic

RB
Least: Bench

ILB
Least: Sole


There are a couple Also's I'd probably remove, but that's more of a judgment call.

Worth noting with RBs that everything has a decent correlation while nothing really stands out.

Last edited by garion333 : 03-17-2015 at 01:33 PM.
garion333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 07:12 PM   #57
Sef0r
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Zealand
So I've got a situation in the APFL league.
I have 1.3 and no doubt right now that the first 2 QBs will be gone (teams without QBs have traded for 1.1 and 1.2).

The 2 highlighted players are the ones I'm struggling with. Hundley has the combines but not the bars (sorry I don't have screenshot of the bars).

Hundley has high sense rush, low timing, and the various passing bars are around the 40 mark.

Grayson has high bars, similar to Mariota - same sense rush as Hundley, high timing and high passing bars around the 80 mark.

Both interviewed "very underrated". Normally I would go with the high combine guy seeing as both have the same sense rush, and I've been lead to believe a very low timing bar is a good thing.

Thoughts?
Attached Images
File Type: jpg APFL-QBs.JPG (42.4 KB, 392 views)
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------
GM Houston Texans - CCFL
GM Snapfinger Jazz - IHOF
GM Detroit Lions - APFL
GM Green Bay Packers - FOOL
GM Jacksonville Jaguars - RZB

Last edited by Sef0r : 05-10-2015 at 07:12 PM.
Sef0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 08:05 PM   #58
GridGlory
n00b
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sef0r View Post

Thoughts?

A 53 Sol?? I think I'm in love!
GridGlory is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 08:12 PM   #59
jzicc
Mascot
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
go with the RB ( I already told you this) ;0)
jzicc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 08:14 PM   #60
Ben E Lou
Morgado's Favorite Forum Fascist
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Greensboro, NC
Winston went to Columbia and Mariota to UNLV?
__________________
The media don't understand the kinds of problems and pressures 54 million come wit'!
Ben E Lou is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2015, 09:13 PM   #61
Sef0r
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Zealand
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben E Lou View Post
Winston went to Columbia and Mariota to UNLV?

The draft class was game generated, it was just the names that were adjusted to match the current draft class. It also just happened to be that the generated class produced at least 2 super rated QBs to match Winston and Mariota.

Be that's besides the point...where is your suggestions? LOL
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------
GM Houston Texans - CCFL
GM Snapfinger Jazz - IHOF
GM Detroit Lions - APFL
GM Green Bay Packers - FOOL
GM Jacksonville Jaguars - RZB
Sef0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 03:52 AM   #62
Sef0r
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Zealand
And here are the 2 QBs bars.
My OC and AC have primary focus on QBs...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Hundley_Grayson.jpg (44.2 KB, 378 views)
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------
GM Houston Texans - CCFL
GM Snapfinger Jazz - IHOF
GM Detroit Lions - APFL
GM Green Bay Packers - FOOL
GM Jacksonville Jaguars - RZB

Last edited by Sef0r : 05-11-2015 at 03:53 AM.
Sef0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 06:41 AM   #63
jzicc
Mascot
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sef0r View Post
And here are the 2 QBs bars.
My OC and AC have primary focus on QBs...
what's your scouting and interview for HC and OC?
jzicc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 07:00 AM   #64
Sef0r
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Zealand
Quote:
Originally Posted by jzicc View Post
what's your scouting and interview for HC and OC?

OC = Scout (85), Interview (15)
HC = Scout (75), Interview (50)

I've attached an example of a similar player (took me 20+ regens to get a similar QB to Hundley) and I simmed until the completion of his 5th seasons 10 times and for the most part he ends up where his bars suggested. Of the 10 sims, 3 of those were hit by the VSOD, dropping him to 20/30-ish rating. The examples below were obviously NOT when he BUSTED.

Interestingly enough, his ratings stayed at about 60/65 after 5 seasons.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Hundley_sample.jpg (75.4 KB, 370 views)
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------
GM Houston Texans - CCFL
GM Snapfinger Jazz - IHOF
GM Detroit Lions - APFL
GM Green Bay Packers - FOOL
GM Jacksonville Jaguars - RZB

Last edited by Sef0r : 05-11-2015 at 07:01 AM.
Sef0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 07:08 AM   #65
Sef0r
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Zealand
So with all things being equal, assumng no VSOD hits either QB here is another way of looking at it - see the projected bars purely based on current scouted bars staying put.
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Hundley_Grayson_dev.jpg (44.9 KB, 370 views)
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------
GM Houston Texans - CCFL
GM Snapfinger Jazz - IHOF
GM Detroit Lions - APFL
GM Green Bay Packers - FOOL
GM Jacksonville Jaguars - RZB
Sef0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 07:24 AM   #66
garion333
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Near Cleveland
You forgot to tell us a critical piece of the puzzle: Combine Correlation.
garion333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 08:13 AM   #67
Sef0r
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Zealand
I don't understand...sorry I'm not new so I probably should...but I don't
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------
GM Houston Texans - CCFL
GM Snapfinger Jazz - IHOF
GM Detroit Lions - APFL
GM Green Bay Packers - FOOL
GM Jacksonville Jaguars - RZB
Sef0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 08:17 AM   #68
jzicc
Mascot
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
50 is combine corr.

____
Sefor -- my scouting is about the same
my interviewing is much better 63/60 (HC/OC) -- and I see the same bars as you - one is underrated and one is Hard to Read ---
jzicc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 09:47 AM   #69
Nemesis
H.S. Freshman Team
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by GridGlory View Post
A 53 Sol?? I think I'm in love!

I drafted a 48 sole QB and he turned out to be shitty. Don't get too excited.

Just a hunch, but Hundley is probably better.
Nemesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 10:17 AM   #70
Laconic1
n00b
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sef0r View Post
I've been lead to believe a very low timing bar is a good thing.

can you expand on that? why would low timing be a good thing?

just curious.
Laconic1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 04:42 PM   #71
Sef0r
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Zealand
Quote:
Originally Posted by Laconic1 View Post
can you expand on that? why would low timing be a good thing?

just curious.

I read a comment somewhere, can't remember where, that mentioned this. I then went looking at all the QBs in the leagues I'm in and checked the top performers and for the most part the ones with very low timing are right up there.

The following QBs graded top 10 in CCFL and FOOL, I only picked the ones with low/no timing.

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=26683

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=35079

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=24165

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...?playerid=7434

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=11541
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------
GM Houston Texans - CCFL
GM Snapfinger Jazz - IHOF
GM Detroit Lions - APFL
GM Green Bay Packers - FOOL
GM Jacksonville Jaguars - RZB
Sef0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 07:14 PM   #72
Nemesis
H.S. Freshman Team
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sef0r View Post
I read a comment somewhere, can't remember where, that mentioned this. I then went looking at all the QBs in the leagues I'm in and checked the top performers and for the most part the ones with very low timing are right up there.

The following QBs graded top 10 in CCFL and FOOL, I only picked the ones with low/no timing.

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=26683

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=35079

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=24165

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...?playerid=7434

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=11541

Have you noticed RB's with low Elusiveness fit this mold as well?
Nemesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 07:35 PM   #73
Sef0r
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: New Zealand
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemesis View Post
Have you noticed RB's with low Elusiveness fit this mold as well?

hmmm interested enough to have a look and yes, most of the players in the top 10 in performance last season (CCFL and FOOL) have a low ELU rating.

The most interesting is this player...

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=30927
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------
GM Houston Texans - CCFL
GM Snapfinger Jazz - IHOF
GM Detroit Lions - APFL
GM Green Bay Packers - FOOL
GM Jacksonville Jaguars - RZB
Sef0r is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-11-2015, 08:18 PM   #74
Nemesis
H.S. Freshman Team
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sef0r View Post
hmmm interested enough to have a look and yes, most of the players in the top 10 in performance last season (CCFL and FOOL) have a low ELU rating.

The most interesting is this player...

http://www.younglifenorthdekalb.com/...playerid=30927

Yeah, Hole Recognition is one of the bigger influences on YPA rushing.

EDIT: and not having to deal with the run-stuffs from high elusiveness also helps.

Last edited by Nemesis : 05-11-2015 at 08:19 PM.
Nemesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2015, 06:25 AM   #75
corbes
College Benchwarmer
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemesis View Post
not having to deal with the run-stuffs from high elusiveness also helps.

LeSean McCoy says he lets his numbers speak for themselves. Also, he thinks you're racist.
corbes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2015, 09:49 AM   #76
Nemesis
H.S. Freshman Team
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Quote:
Originally Posted by corbes View Post
LeSean McCoy says he lets his numbers speak for themselves. Also, he thinks you're racist.

Demarco Murray laughs and disagrees.
Nemesis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-24-2016, 12:16 PM   #77
Firefly
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben E Lou View Post
I'm not sure. The correlation is always so high that I am not sure how useful it is especially when you factor in that it is often closely correlated with bars.

Isn't grade more closely correlated to bars than adjusted grade, though?
Firefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-26-2016, 06:53 PM   #78
Julio Riddols
College Prospect
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Bryson Shitty, NC
If this choice were one to be made on the 39 combine setting then Grayson would have been the pick hands down.
__________________
Recklessly enthused, stubbornly amused.

FUCK EA
Julio Riddols is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-27-2016, 07:04 AM   #79
Tures
n00b
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
What's Hundley's intelligence? I've read somewhere that when Solecismic + Intelligence + Sense Rush (?) are high, he is a pick machine.
So if his intelligence is low, he shouldn't throw many interceptions
Tures is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-28-2016, 08:59 AM   #80
revrew
Team Chaplain
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Just outside Des Moines, IA
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tures View Post
What's Hundley's intelligence? I've read somewhere that when Solecismic + Intelligence + Sense Rush (?) are high, he is a pick machine.
So if his intelligence is low, he shouldn't throw many interceptions

Intelligence low is a good thing, but your equation isn't quite right.

Solecismic = Intelligence + Hidden Avoid Pick rating.

So a high Sole is good, even better with a low intelligence, because it means the avoid pick rating is very good.

Worst case is high intel + low Sole score, because it means Avoid Pick rating is low, and the guy is and interception factory.
__________________
Winner of 6 FOFC Scribe Awards, including 3 Gold Scribes
Founder of the ZFL, 2004 Golden Scribe Dynasty of the Year
Now bringing The Des Moines Dragons back to life, and the joke's on YOU, NFL!
I came to the Crossroad. I took it. And that has made all the difference.
revrew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-14-2018, 07:26 PM   #81
mac88
n00b
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben E Lou View Post
This is based on a large sampling (more than 40 draft classes from both SP and MP), so I would think that a good bit of the noise is removed. I just did a simple correlation coefficient through Excel to determine the correlation between each combine and the maximum current rating that a player achieved during his career. Based on some more detailed looking at the data and running it through the MalcPow filters, I'm confident that this is quite accurate. There may be a stray case or two where one of the "also important" combines is actually the "most important" (or they're actually the same), but overall, I would think this would be helpful.

POSITION MOST IMPORTANT ALSO IMPORTANT LEAST IMPORTANT
QB Bench (10) Solecismic (28), Agility (7.80) Dash
RB Broad Jump (114) Dash (4.65), Agility (7.35), PosDrl (17) Solecismic
FB PosDrl (22) Dash (4.78), Bench (20), Broad Jump (104) Solecismic
TE Broad Jump (102) Dash (4.78), Bench (22), Agil(7.75) Solecismic
WR Dash (4.51) Agility (7.20), PosDrl (42) Broad Jump
C Dash (5.31) Bench (25), Agility (8.00) Solecismic
G Bench (27) Dash (5.27), Agility (7.90) Solecismic
OT Bench (28) Dash (5.27) , Agility (7.80), Broad Jump (84) Solecismic
P Dash (4.97) Bench (10) Agility
K Bench (9) Solecismic (23), Broad Jump (104) Agility
DE Bench (27) Agility (7.60), Dash (4.85) Solecismic
DT Agility (7.80) Bench (28) Solecismic
ILB Agility (7.60) Bench (21), Broad Jump (107) Dash
OLB Agility (7.40) Broad Jump (108), Bench (18), PosDrl (22) Solecismic
CB Bench (12) Dash (4.52), Agility (7.20), PosDrl (37) Broad Jump
S Agility (7.35) Dash (4.59), Bench (15), PosDrl (37) Broad Jump






hi everyone, I just stumbled upon this table - is it still relevant with FOF8?

cheers
mac88 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-07-2019, 09:04 PM   #82
TeamBills59
n00b
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by mac88 View Post
hi everyone, I just stumbled upon this table - is it still relevant with FOF8?

cheers

I'm wondering this myself. I have read some people that say it is and some that say it isn't.
TeamBills59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2019, 10:58 AM   #83
Ushikawa
Mascot
 
Join Date: May 2015
No
Ushikawa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-08-2019, 02:55 PM   #84
TeamBills59
n00b
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ushikawa View Post
No

No they aren't relevant? If that's true I'm surprised the maker of Front Office Football didn't say the important combines changed for the positions.

Last edited by TeamBills59 : 05-08-2019 at 02:55 PM.
TeamBills59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2019, 11:12 AM   #85
MIJB#19
Grizzled Veteran
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Maassluis, Netherlands
The randomness factor for combine scores setting (introduced in FOF8) makes the exact numbers less relevant, but relative figures still can be a sign of how good or bad a player is.
__________________
* 2005 Golden Scribe winner for best FOF Dynasty about IHOF's Maassluis Merchantmen
* Former GM of GEFL's Houston Oilers and WOOF's Curacao Cocktail
MIJB#19 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-12-2019, 12:03 PM   #86
Sharkn20
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
FOF8 is all about bars, unless you have combines accuracy at 100, they are meaningless.
Sharkn20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-14-2019, 08:13 PM   #87
TeamBills59
n00b
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Thanks for the help. Sharkn20 you really feel like the combines are completely meaningless? There must be confusion about this topic because I see a lot of different types of answers.

I kind of like MIJB's advice of using them as a relative measure.
TeamBills59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-15-2019, 07:47 PM   #88
Sharkn20
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamBills59 View Post
Thanks for the help. Sharkn20 you really feel like the combines are completely meaningless? There must be confusion about this topic because I see a lot of different types of answers.

I kind of like MIJB's advice of using them as a relative measure.

I got to the point where I ignore them when they are in the static bars, you can use them as a reference to see if the bar makes sense. But with good scouting bars I trust more the opinion of my Coaching Staff, like a lot more.
Sharkn20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2019, 10:25 AM   #89
garion333
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Near Cleveland
The problem is not everyone is going to have good scouting.

Combines are absolutely not meaningless and saying as such is hurtful to the community at large.

Ignoring combines is ONE way to draft. Get good scouts and then make judgement calls based on those.

But even then the combines are a useful tool to compare to what you are seeing.

Combines are fuzzier than they used to be, which means the margins of what's good/bad and inbetween is no longer a firm, hard rule. Sometimes you will get WRs who have a 4.6 40 and they're perfectly fine players. Other times you get a guy with a 4.3 40 and he sucks. Just like in real life.

Doesn't make the combines worthless, but if you DO manage to get the best scouts it does minimize the impact of combines because you're generally seeing the bars as close to true as you can.

But not everyone, especially in mp, is able to get the best scouts, especially when the best scouts are NEVER let go by the people who have them.
garion333 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-23-2019, 12:47 PM   #90
Sharkn20
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by garion333 View Post
The problem is not everyone is going to have good scouting.

Combines are absolutely not meaningless and saying as such is hurtful to the community at large.

Ignoring combines is ONE way to draft. Get good scouts and then make judgement calls based on those.

But even then the combines are a useful tool to compare to what you are seeing.

Combines are fuzzier than they used to be, which means the margins of what's good/bad and inbetween is no longer a firm, hard rule. Sometimes you will get WRs who have a 4.6 40 and they're perfectly fine players. Other times you get a guy with a 4.3 40 and he sucks. Just like in real life.

Doesn't make the combines worthless, but if you DO manage to get the best scouts it does minimize the impact of combines because you're generally seeing the bars as close to true as you can.

But not everyone, especially in mp, is able to get the best scouts, especially when the best scouts are NEVER let go by the people who have them.

That's what I said that if you have the big Scouting bars, combines are meaningless... Otherwise I just use them to see how they compare to the bars that are not static, and relate them to the ones that are static to make some decisions, but bars are King.
Sharkn20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 12:22 AM   #91
tzach
n00b
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamBills59 View Post
Thanks for the help. Sharkn20 you really feel like the combines are completely meaningless? There must be confusion about this topic because I see a lot of different types of answers.

I kind of like MIJB's advice of using them as a relative measure.


don't ignore combines... high bars and poor combines (specially those related to static bars) = good recipe for busts

Last edited by tzach : 05-24-2019 at 12:25 AM.
tzach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-24-2019, 08:28 AM   #92
TeamBills59
n00b
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Thanks. Speaking of scouting ratings I find it odd that offensive and defensive coordinators are more important than head coaches. I came to this conclusion because head coach and assistant are mostly for interviews and the offensive and defensive coordinators are for scouting.

Last edited by TeamBills59 : 05-24-2019 at 08:29 AM.
TeamBills59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2019, 02:54 PM   #93
Dolphin
n00b
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Cincy, OH
Lets be honest here, if a person has to keep databases and research every minute detail to figure out how the game works, something is really wrong with the game. If the bars hold no value, you scouts hold not value, and the combine scores hold no value, what is the point?
Dolphin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-27-2019, 11:45 PM   #94
tzach
n00b
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
if you want more certainty, just turn the combine correlation to 100.
tzach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 12:33 AM   #95
TeamBills59
n00b
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sharkn20 View Post
That's what I said that if you have the big Scouting bars, combines are meaningless... Otherwise I just use them to see how they compare to the bars that are not static, and relate them to the ones that are static to make some decisions, but bars are King.

There are 2 different bars, static and nonstatic? I've never seen 2 different ones.
TeamBills59 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-28-2019, 12:56 PM   #96
Front Office Midget
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Manitowoc, Wisconsin
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dolphin View Post
Lets be honest here, if a person has to keep databases and research every minute detail to figure out how the game works, something is really wrong with the game. If the bars hold no value, you scouts hold not value, and the combine scores hold no value, what is the point?

If you want combines to be everything, set it to 100 and draft by combines. IF you want bars to be everything, set it to 0 and draft by bars.

Uncertainty is there to simulate the uncertainty that every staff feels on NFL draft day.
Front Office Midget is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2019, 08:53 AM   #97
QuikSand
lolzcat
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
Quote:
Originally Posted by TeamBills59 View Post
There are 2 different bars, static and nonstatic? I've never seen 2 different ones.

Do some digging on the term here for more background, but "static bars" is a global reference to certain skills that, in FOF, are basically always fully developed. Easiest example to see is with defensive coverage skills... man-to-man and zone coverage frequently show up as something like 21/54, right? But check out bump-and-run coverage... with very few slight exceptions, this bar will be fully complete in every player, even a freshly minted rookie, like 41/41. Every position has at least one, sometimes several, of these ratings that are just different than the rest. This community has taken to calling them "static bars" to reflect that they don't really evolve over time... that guy with 21/54 zone coverage is probably going to develop over his first few seasons from 21/54 to 24/50 to 33/44 to 39/39, as a fairly common example. The guy who started out 41/41 might hover slightly around that level, but probably won't move much there... 41/41 to 42/42 to 42/42 to 40/40, frex.

So, take a look in game, and you can quickly see which ratings are like this. Running backs have three IIRC, and so forth. There's a good deal of evidence suggesting that these ratings are themselves useful indicators of what draftees are more "real" than others. Two guys with fairly comparable bars and fairly comparable combines... but one DB happens to have much higher projections in bump coverage and punishing hitter... then makes him a better bet to develop than the other guy, all else equal.
QuikSand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2019, 04:44 PM   #98
JustinSmith94
n00b
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuikSand View Post
Every position has at least one, sometimes several, of these ratings that are just different than the rest.

Is there somewhere I can find the list of all these static bars?
JustinSmith94 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-29-2019, 05:05 PM   #99
Squirrel
Mascot
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuikSand View Post
But check out bump-and-run coverage... with very few slight exceptions, this bar will be fully complete in every player, even a freshly minted rookie, like 41/41.

This is interesting Quik because this isn't what I thought static bars means.

For me I thought it meant the bars where the correlation between the draft prospect's bar and the actual player's bar is particularly high. I think I mean the future bar but I suppose I mean the current bar as well as I think I'm right in saying that players with high statics tend to have high current, relative to the % dev.

Am I missing something, do you think?
Squirrel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-30-2019, 07:46 AM   #100
Sharkn20
High School Varsity
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Quote:
Originally Posted by JustinSmith94 View Post
Is there somewhere I can find the list of all these static bars?

In Draft Analizer the green ones.
Sharkn20 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:31 PM.



Powered by vBulletin Version 3.6.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.