 |
10-01-2007, 09:38 AM
|
#1 | ||
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Wilson Whippoorwills - A Partially Participatory Playtesting Dynasty (FOF 6.1)
Wilson Whippoorwills – a Partially Participatory Playtesting Dynasty
Like a lot of FOF fans, I have lost momentum in playing the game solo of late – for whatever reason, I’m just not getting as much out of it as I used to. The trouble is – with a new patch out yet again, changing lots of things about the game, I feel like I’m at risk of falling even further behind the “cutting edge” unless I at least familiarize myself with how the game works. So, my idea with this dynasty is basically to try my best to get immersed with a team that I build myself, as usual, but then to use it as a vehicle to try to do some gameplanning testing. Maybe that way, getting some test results from various gameplan ideas will seem less tedious to me. So, along the way, my hopes are, not necessarily in order: -to enjoy myself in building an FOF team from the ground up -to learn more about drafting and player development in FOF 6.1 -to do some reasonable testing with a completely new offensive scheme -to do some additional testing with an existing defensive scheme Last edited by QuikSand : 10-01-2007 at 09:39 AM. |
||
|
|
|
10-01-2007, 09:39 AM
|
#2 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
The Playtesting Side
Here’s what I have in mind. Once I have made a reasonable effort to build up the team and get out of the first-few-years doldrums that comes along with any Empty Cupboard start, I plan to do a couple things a little bit different than the standard play-it-out and on-to-next-year style. First – I’m planning to run my team’s season something like ten times, using the gameplans that I have in mind for it. I may run it ten times with a “control” gameplan for comparison, or something along those lines. So, as I develop the team, it won’t be my usual quick-advance to the next offseason – here, I will intend to really spend some time on the season itself, and maybe take some time to try to develop the gameplan itself. Second – I’m also planning to post the game files and gameplans once the team is ready for the regular season. That way, anyone else who wants to follow along will be able to “tinker” a bit with this team as well. I had originally thought about just starting up another GroupThink exercise – but decided that a more focused effort here would be better. The community effort here will just be on gameplanning – and area that I think is woefully underdevloped in the greater FOF community. Maybe this will help. So – that’s the idea, I’m going to manage the offseason, and try to take the drafts seriously, etc – and then use that developing team as a laboratory for some testing efforts. And I’ll welcome anyone else who want to alter the gameplans and run some tests of their own. (And if nobody takes the bait, that’s fine by me, too… I’m hoping this might appeal to some people, but I may be wrong) |
|
|
|
|
10-01-2007, 09:39 AM
|
#3 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
The Setup
I am starting out in a purely fictional league, set in Western New York. My team will be the Wilson Whippoorwills – based in a small town on Lake Ontario where I have some family ties. The remainder of the league’s franchises are scattered around in the greater Niagara Falls area – mostly small towns and areas in surrounding Niagara County, NY. It will require a massive suspension of disbelief to accept these tiny towns supporting mega-sports complexes and salaries – deal with it as you must. Rather than building my rosters and then deciding what style of team I want to play, I’m going in the opposite direction. We will be building the teams around a certain playing style on both sides of the ball. OFFENSE – We will run a ball-control offense, looking to run first behind powerful run blockers. I plan to invest pretty heavily in tight ends and fullbacks, as the offense will very often line up in 2-TE formations, running something fairly close to a “double wing” setup. Ideally, if this gameplan gets shaped up to be pretty effective, I might think this could be of use in a multi-player league, where the team could take advantage of the relatively low cap and draft investment necessary to assemble a team that doesn’t focus all that heavily on expensive positions like QB and WR. DEFENSE – My plan here is to run and refine my already-public “MinWage defense.” It’s basically a base 3-3-5 defense, where we are in a nearly perpetual nickel formation. My thinking here is to try to assemble a deep stable of defensive backs who can both play the run effectively and go for interceptions – and to not worry all that much about their actual pass coverage skills. Again, I’m trying to find a way to assemble a team that may be cheap – I’ll at least start out with a heavy-blitz mentality, with hopes that this defense might be effective for a team trying to economize on positions like pass-rushing DE and shut-down CB, both of which are just brutally tough to find and keep in difficult leagues. So, I take control of the Wilson team for 2007, trade away what players I can (following the initial dispersal draft) and QuikSim the season. To my surprise (especially after trading away the 1st round pick at QB) the team actually goes 12-4 … so any hopes I might secretly have had for a top draft pick are shot – our slot is actually #29. The goal is to build up the team through three drafts, and once we get ready to run the 2010 season, we ought to have enough to put on the field to start having something to do in gameplanning, etc. One other note – for this career, I have turned OFF personality and team chemistry. I tend to enjoy that stuff, and I’m just afraid that my investment in that side of the game would get too tedious and time-intensive, so I’m excluding it for the first time in any career of mine. |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 11:57 AM
|
#4 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Wilson Whippoorwills Player Report
(WIL08c - WIL08d)
Last edited by QuikSand : 10-02-2007 at 11:58 AM. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 12:00 PM
|
#5 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
So, nothing too shocking there – we get one big camp boom, but it’s one of those guys who “booms” from being totally worthless to only mostly worthless, despite the +10 in apparent ratings. He’ll get to play, and at a key slot like CB, but he will need to keep growing to become a serious player.
My top two draft picks both look like decent, but not spectacular players. The second round LT looks as though he may turn out to be the better of the two tackles we took, which is okay, I guess. At QB, we get a nice +3 from Nick Cook – who now looks like a mighty 7/24. Another guy who might be worth **something** with some extended playing time. We’ll see – I’m enchanted enough with late round pick Alvin Neil and his 4.45 forty time at the combine to be inclined to give him a chance to earn it. if he didn’t have an uncomfortable void in the “sense rush” skill, I’d think he was exactly what I want from my QB for this offense. So – who looks promising for this year? We’ll try to run a lot, and I suspect Deron Ambrose will merit most of the carries, so he could end up with decent numbers. A terrible EC team usually has some big tackle numbers for its top LBs – this team might give that privilege to a guy like SILB Kendall Pierce (a creeper who might have a serious shot at a long term role for us) or WILB Donald Flinch (18/45 but a –6 training camp). Fifth rounder J.T. Brooks at free safety is also a likely tackle magnet for this team, too. |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 12:01 PM
|
#6 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Without further ado, here are the summary results from our marvelous 1-15 debut season. At least we will have a top draft pick to build around.
Code:
So – between results on the field, and movement of the scouted ratings – who looks like a long-term keeper from this lot? CB Lee Ciszek – a +10 in training camp, and a run-stopper skill set makes him the most promising defender we have for this system. Even assuming we put some capable players around him, he looks like a great fit. 87+16 tackles and 7 passes defensed made him among our best defenders (overlook the massive 68 passes he allowed). SS Rich Breien – similarly a good match for the skills we want, even though he doesn’t have the upward skills trajectory, he has enough ability in the key areas I want to get us by here for a while, at least. 101+39 tackles and a passable 73/7 PD% makes him our defensive standout for this first year, and a DROY candidate for certain. RB Deron Ambrose – posted 4 yards a carry for this crappy team, has some return skills, and looks to be worth keeping around a while. LT Derek Shea – Developing slowly, but projects as a pretty solid and balanced LT starter. Probably a few more guys form this crop who will still be around in three years, obviously including our top draft picks, but my guess is that these four guys have probably earned their long-term tickets already. QB Alvin Neil wasn’t horrible, and might get a second season as a starter to cut down on the interceptions – if he can become a fairly error-free guy back there, that might be good enough. |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 12:08 PM
|
#7 |
|
Pro Starter
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Burke, VA
|
Another Deep Blue dynasty! w00t! It's like being in college and getting a check from mom and dad without asking!
Thanks, Quik! I'll be following along closely. Last edited by Toddzilla : 10-02-2007 at 12:08 PM. |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 01:11 PM
|
#8 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Thanks for the flattery. I hope this proves to be interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 01:15 PM
|
#9 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2009 Offseason
With a team that doesn’t sign any free agents, the offseason is really easy – we just need to remember to do our rookie interviews before hitting “skip remaining stages” this year. Might be nice, dumbass. This draft, we hold the #1 pick overall, and the top slot in every round, plus the picks at 1(21) and 2(2) from earlier trades. So, we ought to get a chance for one major impact player – or else more from one or more trade-downs, which I usually prefer to do in this spot – as well as a few solid contributors with those top four picks in the first 34 slots. Okay – we get new deals in place for a number of key young players I definitely want to return from last year’s team – and we hit the draft with 21 players signed. The clear choices for tip-top picks in this draft are at DL and WR. I think I can easily deal down from 1.1 and still come away very happy, so I work a deal to move to 1.3 – picking up Sanborn’s #1 next year. Hey – they are picking #3 this year, so that figures to be a good pick as well. They take the top WR, and I am not thrilled that one of my top two defensive linemen will definitely be there for us at 1.3 if we want to use that pick. When the best pass-rushing DE goes at #2, my board reads DT then WR. DT Ricardo Harmon seems perfect for us at NT – he was off the charts in the agility drill with a 7.28, backing up his maxed-out run stopping projection. I think he’s just what we want here, I decline to get tricky, and just use the pick. Code:
When one of my top handful of players is still there at pick #12 overall, we get on the horn, and work out a deal with Wright’s Corners. We give up the pick at 2.2, but move up nine spots to grab yet another major talent at defensive end, and I now feel like our defensive front ought to be a HUGE asset for this team for the long haul. The guy I really liked for pick 2.1 was a hard-tackling CB Riddick Mills, who got taken at #18. I might have traded up had he slipped down maybe 5 more spots or so, but as it is, we sit back and wait to see what comes to us. I end up getting lured in by a mostly-bars pick at LB, taking a guy I didn’t even interview. Combines were pretty good, and I am hopeful I’m landing a long-term answer here at one of the inside LB positions. In round three, I’m watching a CB my scout liked fall and fall, and I wait as long as I can before trading to get him. I try to trade up to pick 2.19, but the price is actually pretty steep, and I decide to wait a few more slots. My target guy goes two picks later to Golden Hill, and I’m out of luck. Wuss. Now, on to “system” players. In round three I go for a well-developed all-around fullback, trying to address one of the supposed feature positions for this offense we intend to run. And in round four I reach for a safety my scout liked, who has good skills to match the supposed defense – he’s a run stopper with good ball skills, but not much in coverage. Round five is another stab-in-the-dark with a fast QB – Irv Borders has been the top guy on the “big board” for a long time, and his combine was good enough to get me to take a flier here. RB Louchiey looks like he may have some potential as a power runner for us, and Bert Beriera will try to unseat my current starter at the full-time pass rushing WLB slot, and was a college teammate of Cornell Dennis back at NC State. Okay – in the post-draft market, we pursue a fleet of rookies as usual, and re-sign a number of our carryover players from last year in slots where I don’t think we’re set with new blood. |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 01:17 PM
|
#10 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 01:18 PM
|
#11 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
So, in the effort (during the actual draft) to find a reliable quarterback by pursuing some “athletical” (sic) types we end up with some intriguing but shrinking skill sets. Now we have a challenge – as our rookie free agent Carl Blaine has jumped up 7 points in training camp, and despite being basically as green as grass, that is a strong indicator that he may indeed be the best guy for the job, in the medium to long term. Makes for a tough year this year – but that was in the offing anyhow, so I think we will indeed hand things over to Blaine. Here’s a snapshot of him coming out of training camp… you might want to hide your eyes, lest the bright green of most of his bars overwhelm you.
Actually, here’s a snapshot of the three QBs who are worthy of consideration for this year and potentially beyond:  Borders looks the most ready to play to me, but he and Neil both are on a standard downward trajectory – so no reason to give them credit for much they don’t already have in red. Blaine is the mystery guy here – he doesn’t know any formations, and basically has no skills right now – but in camp he suggested he can get a lot better. I assume playing time would help. Our “bars” pick at LB for slot 2.1 doesn’t look very impressive – and he will likely end up in a time-splitting setup with undrafted Donald Finch, last year’s starter. The battle for playing time at WLB will be tough – rookie Bart Bierria looks about as good as second year man Allen Richard, to me, though neither is a very complete player. DB Riddick Iadevaia made a nice gain in camp, and he will get moved to SS where he will have a shot to really play. Okay – we pare down to preseason depth, and eventually get our final roster of 53 set. My plan is to go with Irv Borders at QB, as he just seems to have the best skills for what we want to do. I may pull the switch halfway through the season and give young Carl Blaine a shot to develop, though. It’s just tough to see how far Blaine has to go. Mostly this year is still about developing players who will be useful for us once this team is worth a damn – I still don’t expect more than a few wins from this group, regardless of who plays QB or anywhere else. |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 01:19 PM
|
#12 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2009 Season
The first half is a tragedy, a monstrous 0-8 with no close games, really. Second half, with Carl Blaine in until I apparently let Rex bench him, is sparked with an initial win, but that’s all we get – another 1-15 season in the bag. Code:
Players of note: QB Irv Borders doesn’t look like the “don’t lose the game” guy we want here. Tough to ask for a lot of precision from any rookie QB – he will be in the mix next year along with Blaine, who may have another notch forward in development, we hope. WR Tyrell Curtis is clearly the go-to guy in the passing game, as his y/t productivity is far and away the best we have. We may need to arrange the personnel usage for next season, to make sure he’s the WR on the field for all of our 1-WR sets. Next year, maybe he can actually catch a TD pass. Wow. DT Ricardo Harmon was playing well, but go hurt late in the season. Incomplete. DE Craig Fisk is going to be very good. Very solid rookie year. LB Kendall Pierce finally got in there to put up the big tackle numbers I thought he might – not much past tackles, but he did rack up a solid tackle total. Rated 27/27 at season’s end, I wonder if he has any more development ahead. LB Cornell Dennis ended up moving outside to the sam slot, and thrived there, at least in part due to lack of real competition. 83 tackles and 6.5 sacks might get him noticed in DROY voting, despite my overall disappointment. CB Antonio Shergalas manned our nickel back slot all year, and that tackle total is actually unnerving to me. He looks more like a standard man-up corner (not a run stopper type, as I prefer) so perhaps I’m better off letting him play CB in the nickel, and dropping a guy like Bart Lofton into the nickel slot? LB Burt Bierria put up a nominally pretty impressive season from the pass-rushing willie slot, with a team-leading 11.5 sacks. No help in the run defense, but for now, it looks like he has grabbed that job. |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 04:00 PM
|
#13 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2010 Offseason
We have a couple of players who get honors after last season, including (no shock) the defensive rookie of the year. The other one, though, is quite a surprise to me: Code:
So, Bart Bierria is the best defensive rookie, even though he doesn’t merit any attention for leaguewide honors. Meanwhile, CB Bart Lofton is tagged as a first team all-pro at cornerback (driven largely by his 65 tackles, but he did post 5 picks and 11 PDs) but comes up short compared to Bierria. Okay – well, nice to see both guys get recognized, I guess. I will be looking for more guys named Bart to add to the defense, needless to say. That seems to be a better drafting angle than most. Okay, I want to try to think out the draft here a little more clearly, as my goal is to start this season and open the team up for exploration and testing. So, I hope to land a few players who can make a material impact on the team right away, and I’d rather (for right now, at least) focus our main efforts at slots that I don’t feel are essentially “taken.” With that in mind, here’s my loose rank-order of priority for additions: Cornerback – we have some decent complementary players, but really could use a guy or two to build around, likely from an early draft pick Running Back – same feeling with Ambrose, who seems like a nice #2, but we would be far better off running a serious back out there Interior Line – I’m happy with both tackles and their development, and with RG Hudson – but I’d like to add one more power run blocker, preferably at the LG slot Quarterback – might be our top priority, but a good fit here would be nice Tight End – supposedly a focus position of this offense, but I have not invested here, out of confidence we can grab creepers late or after the draft I definitely feel that we have invested plenty along the defensive line, and probably at linebacker, so I’d have to find a perfect fit to invest serious capital there. I include CB above, but not safety, but really I’m sort of thinking of my DB group as a big blur – I like the guys I have at safety right now, and am hoping for a nice offseason bump there, but I wouldn’t rule out taking a safety this year. |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 04:01 PM
|
#14 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Anyway – here’s the movement in player ratings as we tick the “Begin Free Agency” button – this is a pretty important stage, especially for young creepers. I want to see several of our guys make a little bump up here in their future ratings.
QB Carl Blaine continues to look completely green, but his ceiling keeps rising. Guess we would have been better off using him all year last year – if we were going to lose 15 games anyhow. Nice gains from a few more confirmed creepers: WR Tyrell Curtis – already our top guy and getting better C Donnie Fisk – might be a long term answer there for us after all DE Craig Fisk – yes yes, the real deal here, DL looking great LB Riddick Scarlett – I got him playing time last year at S, needs to keep it up LB Kendall Pierce – Solid starter and CB Lee Ciszek – Continues his development, but run D isn’t filling in much CB Antonio Shergalis – Looking like he will stick for us in the CB mix I am disappointed to see the drop from S Iadevaia, the one guy I expected to keep creeping who reversed course and dropped here. That might push safety up into my list of needs after all. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 04:02 PM
|
#15 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2010 Rookie Draft
So – we have the picks at 1.2 and 1.5 to build around, and the balance of our initial complement from the 2nd overall slot. I invest my interviews heavily in need areas, and we will try to be well prepared for the draft here. The top two players in the draft, by my thinking, are a lights-out CB (without much run-stopping ability, natch) and a combine-stud QB who ran a 4.42 at the combine and lifted 17 times. We have one or the other if we want them. On to the draft we go. We hold a ton of capitol here at 2 and 5, with the ability to either land two major impact players, or else to move down and pick up more for now or the future. I do some digging, to see what we could get from a move down from #2. I’m pretty confident we could go well with a move down to maybe #6 to 8 overall, and with picks at slots like 5 and 6, we would very likely come away with two stellar defensive backs, as there’s a safety in the draft I love (and think he would convert to play safety just great). Doing so likely gives up on the top QB in the draft, which I recognize as a risky thing to so – but to be honest, spending a top pick on a QB here just sends us in the direction as any other team, and I’m trying to avoid that. Ideally, I’d like to build a team where we can count on the running game first and a controlled passing game from a game-manager QB and still do well. The decision on whether to go for the “sure thing” QB here (and I don’t assume that he is a sure thing, but he has to be leaps and bounds better than the guys we have on hand now) is a real challenge. Indeed, a good stopping point for now, as I mull it over a bit. To add to the flavor here – the team at 1.7 would send us their 1st rounder next year to trade up to 1.2. That promises to be yet another impact player. Late addition – it turns out the team at 1.4 would also give up **their** 1st rounder next year to deal up to 1.2 – so that’s an even more attractive offer. I don’t think that the QB is likely to be there at 1.4, but at least we could likely get something for an additional trade-down from 1.4 to 1.7 if we wanted to (if there were three or four guys I really liked still available – pretty likely if one or two DL go with these top picks). |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 04:05 PM
|
#16 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
I'm open to input here... I think I will hold off until at least tomorrow morning before running this draft. To fuel the debate - here is the QB that has me thinking seriously about going against the plan and investing a *very* early pick at that position.
 |
|
|
|
|
10-02-2007, 08:22 PM
|
#17 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Well, the list of pros for taking Hall here seem simple to follow:
Good with short and medium passes and accuracy - bread and butter for this offense, I think Good two-minute offense - should have skills to lead team if behind, often a weakness for run-first teams Good scrambling skills and 40 time backs that up - if we focus on a run-blocking line, he should expect pressure Excellent overall combine suggests ratings are understated, and scout agrees Cons: Even if he has a bright future, he's only 20% developed and knows only 8 formations, so there would be a learning curve until he can manage even this limited 2TE offense Spending a top pick at QB sort of undermines the "romance" of trying to build a team in a fairly unconventional manner, focusing on the blockers, running game, and defense He probably needs to actually boom/creep to merit that high a pick -- since I'm fairly new at the 6.1 game, that's a pretty big risk to take, where there are seemingly "safer" picks to pursue, especially at DB |
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 08:36 AM
|
#18 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Well, so much for input. I'm tied up until at least early afternoon today, but right now I'm leaning toward passing on the QB, and hopefully taking two of my top three targeted DBs with our picks, probably at #4 and #5.
|
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 09:02 AM
|
#19 |
|
High School Varsity
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Noblesville
|
From the peanut gallery, and certainly with no significant insight into the inner workings of the game, I'd find it pretty hard to turn down 1.4 plus a future 1 for the 1.2...
|
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 09:25 AM
|
#20 |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Roseville, CA
|
I'm by no means a vet of the game, but I'd say take the QB. If he can manage the offense well and perform in the offense that's gameplanned, he seems like a good choice to do so.
It does go against the desired formula for this team a bit by spending big money on a QB, but wouldn't you need to spend to get a good game manager, which is what this kid appears to be from scouting? |
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 02:55 PM
|
#21 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Okay, with all that waiting done… I decide to get back in, and work through this draft. I don’t have a lot of middle-round targets that excite me from my interviews, so I’m thinking I will try to acquire a future 1st rounder, and also try to move up to get a second early 2nd rounder this year. We’ll see how that goes. But I’m definitely going to trade down to #4, and basically expect to lose the QB by doing so.
So, we deal down from 1.2 to 1.4, and have to love getting a future 1st for doing so. We take on some risk here by allowing the possibility that the top three picks are QB-CB-CB, which would leave me without two guys in this draft that I love. That would probably have me trading down substantially or out from one of these picks at 4-5. The deal with Warrens Corners, incidentally, looks especially good since they spent their top pick on a QB last year, and I don’t think he looks that good. So, they might be a pretty good bet to remain a lousy team, making that pick an early one again next year. Stay tuned. Anyway… we let go with the first three picks… 1. Tonawanda - Quinones, Jerald, CB, Virginia Tech 2. Warrens Corners - Hall, Quinn, QB, Wake Forest 3. Goat Island - Atkins, Corwin, WR, Hillsdale Okay, that makes things pretty clear to me. Warrens Corners does indeed go QB again (I’m a bit surprised by that) and CB Quinones looks like the top sure-thing there… but the WR pick is what we needed. Now, if I want to, I can take the next CB (a better run stopper than Quinones, and still looks like an overall stud to me) and then the best safety, a guy who could probably become a bookend CB if that’s where I wanted him. The remaining question is whether to move down a few slots and try to still get the safety, who ranks maybe 15th or so on the remaining big board. I decide not to mess around with the pick at 1.4, and we just select CB Nate Gunn here, rather than risk losing him. My scout found him “hard to read” but he was red or blue in every combine element save the broad jump, and his lack of return skills isn’t a concern for me. I’m thrilled with the pick. At 64/86 in our first look, he’s head and shoulders the best player we have in our secondary before he even puts on shoulder pads. A trade down from 1.5 to 1.8 doesn’t seem to yield very much for us – and I really don’t want to deal down all that far here, as I don’t have another player I really like beyond the top safety. The top 9 guys on the big board right now are 6 defensive lienemen, one linebacker, one tackle, and one receiver. None are guys I want to go make a huge investment in. And the top RB looks fairly marginal to me, while my scout says he is overrated. Nothing has me really itching here. And since the best I can get for a deal-down to #7 or #8 seems to be a 4th round pick (wow), I see no point in that – and I just take my target guy here. I don’t like the scout impression, but the combine was stellar, and he’s pretty well developed – I think I have another guy here who basically can’t miss, even if he misses. Code:
Kim Rood makes a 97% switch to the RCB slot, and I can’t help but think this is the best way to go, especially given his coverage strengths (seemingly maxed out in loose man and bump). We can now hope that he soon becomes the best second corner in the league. Early in round two, I’m not thrilled with our options here, and I feel it might be too early to reach for the one RB I am fond of (I’m thinking round three for him). I decide that the best center in the draft, a guy my scout liked, is the best bet here, and we go after a stated need position, addressing the interior line. I pass here on a very good-looking safety, but he has very little ballhawking skills, and I have stated that’s something I really want to focus on here, so I overlook him. But if he slides to the middle of the round, I intend to make a deal to get him. The safety is gone two picks later, natch. Two RBs get picked, and now I’m nervous about missing on the guy we liked there. I check his endurance, and see that he doesn’t look like a full-time back anyhow, so I choose not to panic. Pick 57 is the next RB in the ordered list, putting my guy atop the RB list, and I decide to swing a minor deal to move up just enough to grab the next pick, and take RB Riddick Marble, at the cost of our 4th round pick. By round five, there’s a scarcity of guys we even bothered to interview – I’d like to take a “scout recommended” guy here, but that’s no mean feat. Best I can do is a combine skipper at G my scout said should live up to his billing as a decent-enough run blocker. Sixth round is a stab in the dark with a low-bars FB who has been atop the list for at least the last round. My scout says he’s only as good as advertised, but the combine seemed awfully good, so I’m picking him in hopes of a boom, and maybe a long-term guy we can use in our FB-friendly offense. NOTE – I am not panicked when he appears as only 15/27 pre-camp. That’s where his bars were anyway, this is not where he would reveal himself to be better if he were indeed better than that. That comes after camp, and only in small steps, if at all. WR Sammie Stuart is a stab in the dark with the 7th rounder – a few good combine numbers make him seem worth a look, as we have a slot or two likely to be open at WR this year. |
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 04:11 PM
|
#22 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2010 Pre-Camp and Training Camp
Heh, curious – we are offered a 4th round draft choice for young QB Carl Blaine from the Goat Island Rams. That’s a new one on me – the guy is rated 6/51 by my scout, I don’t recall ever getting interest from a player like that from an AI team. The deal really isn’t appetizing, but it is interesting, at least. Another note of interest – it looks like Reynales beach has just gone “empty cupboard” themselves. I don’t know what their situation was leading up to this, but they are down to 9 signed players, including 5 rookies, and they have $22m in cap space. Seems like there might be a roster management bug in play there – I think this has already been reported elsewhere. Anyway, we fill up the team for training camp, once again loading up with “lottery ticket” rookies, hoping to land a boom rookie or three along the way. |
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 06:59 PM
|
#23 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 07:00 PM
|
#24 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Okay – first things first. Our top rookie corners came through camp –2 and –1… that’s not perfect, but doesn’t indicate a massive crumble-down either. Both guys are already high-quality players, and ought to be complete beasts. I suspect we will use Bart Lofton as our nearly full-time nickel corner, and relegate Lee Ciszek (who dropped a point in this camp, to my surprise) to a backup role. Suddenly, CB is a position of relative strength for us.
Actually, on further examination, I think we will slide Lee Ciszek over to play at strong safety, where he may actually start for us after all. Rookie Vinnie Anthony “boomed” there, but he’s still a long way away from even repsectable ratings, and I’m not thrilled with guys like Iadevaia, who again failed to move forward in camp. We are very happy at RB, where two rookies broke out with +3 camps, including our draft trade-up target Riddick Marble, who now basically owns the starting job. I expect we will use Deron Ambrose and our other breakout rookie Troy Long behind him, and maybe we are getting closer to “having the horses” to do something with this team’s running game after all. FB Jon Bundren gave us a modest creep of +1, but nothing exciting. Ten more years of +1 creeping and he’s still a guy we likely cut. Don’t know what we’ll do there. C Emmitt Dawkins looks like a stud, and I think we’ll get something out of G Walters as well, so it looks like we may be close to “done” with our offensive line investment, unless we stumble into an impact player at some point. Here’s a draft recap, with the ratings movement added in: Code:
What the hell should we do at linebacker with this team? We have three confirmed creepers, all still fairly low-ratings guys, who need playing time to develop. Kendall Pierce seems entrenched at the SILB slot, and he keeps moving up in ratings. Rookie Walt Haynes have us a +3 camp, and my best guess is that given playing time, he’ll turn out to be better than last year’s second round pick Cornell Dennis. Meanwhile, SLB Riddick Scarlett is a creeper, too. And that sets aside Bart Bierria, who played damned well for us at WLB last year. What makes the most sense, assuming we basically have three starting slots? Tough call. I think it behooves us to find Walt Haynes regular playing time, as I think he will fill into a pretty good starting-quality player. I don’t know. |
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 07:06 PM
|
#25 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
And now, the "partially participatory" part of the program.
I have created a Yahoo! mail account, with this information: username: wilsonwhippoorwills password: whipit If you log into this Yahoo! mail account, you can get three files: -one with the containers of my separate "Niagara" folder, and a batch file to install them and launch FOF, if you're into that sort of thing -two that contain all the contents of my Universe folder relevant to this career (might be more than necessary in there, I really don't know about file contents, so I just zipped up everything created in the last couple of days) Get and unzip these files as directed, and you can open this career and see what's going on. The game is finished with the preseason, and we are ready to start the regular season. As promised, my intent here is to run the coming season over and over, trying out different things and testing to see what works, and what doesn't. If you're interested in doing some testing of your own with this team, or just following along, go get the files, and you can see who these guys are, and offer your thoughts on how to tweak the offense and defense. I will send my offensive and defensive gameplan files to the email account momentarily, as well, so those will be there, too. Last edited by QuikSand : 10-03-2007 at 07:06 PM. |
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 07:32 PM
|
#26 |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Oct 2002
|
Nate Gunn is a pretty cool name.
Oh, and sorry about not participating in the QB-trade down debate (at work w/o internet access all day). But, I would've ignored the QB b/c it would've been too easy (let's see what happens with Blaine) |
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 07:41 PM
|
#27 | |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Quote:
Yes yes on Gunn. And basically, that's what moved me with the QB situation as well. I'll try to keep tabs on "the one that got away" too (though I failed to watch his training camp result) but I think it will be more interesting to try to build a "manage the game" team without a star back there, anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
10-03-2007, 10:18 PM
|
#28 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Gameplan Testing
Okay… what I intend to do here is to create a big testing analysis, using the QuikTest template discussed (and made available) in this thread. I think it’s probably best to tinker with offense and defense separately – so I’m going to start with a baseline. I will use the offensive gameplan I made available – the WPW Doublewing, a run-first offense using lots of 2TE formations and mostly pretty conservative passing. This is an attempt to use a “manage the game” offense, of the style like perhaps the Baltimore Ravens have used in some of their more successful recent seasons when their defense seemed capable of basically winning games on their own. For now, I will just leave the offense alone (trying to leave that as a constant) and instead I will tinker with the defense. My thinking with this team was to try to use a based 3-3-5 setup, and build talent well suited to that. My “minwage defense” is that 3-3-5 base defense, with the added twist of a nearly-universal blitz on almost all expectations. My general thinking behind the defense was to try to simultaneously gain whatever systemic advantages are afforded by using the nickel package (which I believe there are some in the game – I’m guessing it’s just some sort of generic adjustment to play outcomes resulting from formations selected), along with the presumed benefits of an aggressive pass rush (creating, presumably, more hurries, blocked passes, and sacks). In testing with another team, I found that this novelty system seemed to perform reasonably well, when compared to a standard staff-recommended defensive scheme. My hope would be that trying to fit players around a specialized system (especially if it allows for some economies in player acquisition) would be a benefit, eventually. Anyway – on to this team. My first test will be to try and see whether the blitzing actually helps things. Maybe a team like this would be better off with a normal complement of blitzes, or even with a lower share of blitzing, relying more on its extra cover men to stop the pass, and leaving linebackers free to help stop the run (which presumably should be a relative weakness of this scheme, thus my push toward DBs with run-stopping skills). So, I will test essentially the same Minwage defense (3-3-5 base) with different levels of blitzing, and see if there’s any detectable movement in results over ten seasons of each, with injuries turned off. My abbreviated results for the team using the gameplans as sent out in the public files are as follows: Average team wins: 4.2 Rushing defense: 32 – 135 for 4.25 ypc Passing defense: 18/27.5 (66%) for 206 yds/gm, 7.55 yds/att Pass Rush: 12.8 Pass Def: 42.7 Turnovers: 23.5 Points Allowed: 23.8 With a team this committed to blitzing (60% on 1st and 2nd down, 70% on 3rd and 4th down), and some pretty passable talent along the defensive front, I’d expect the pass rush to rank up there pretty well. The 13.9 PR%, however, comes in as less than the league average – in fact, the team did not manage to rank better than 18th in this aggregate stat in a single season in ten trials. That’s pretty disappointing. Looking through the individual stats, I’m seeing not many big numbers for sacks by any of our logical pass rush leaders, either. DE Fisk averaged about 7 a season, and we occasionally saw pretty impressive numbers from DT Harmon, SLB Dennis, or WLB Bierria, but nothing consistent. Maybe it’s an overall lack of talent from the team – but we’re simply not really “getting after the QB” in the fashion that you’d expect from a very high blitzing defense. So… we’ll try the middle ground. I’ll back off the blitzing, and see whether things get better. Presumably we will see that PR% number come down in the aggregate (if it doesn’t… then what?) but I’d like to think that we’d see some offsetting gains in the run defense and/or the PD%. I’ll again run ten trials, and summarize. My first trial is an alarming 0-16 season, and I wonder if I might have stumbled onto something crazy – but it smoothes out with the ten trials, and here’s the summary: Average team wins: 4.0 (slightly worse) Rushing defense: 32 – 130 for 4.07 ypc (better) Passing defense: 17.8/28.5 (62%) for 201 yds/gm, 7.09 yds/att (better) Pass Rush: 14.0 (better !?!?) Pass Def: 49.7 (much better) Turnovers: 25.4 (slightly better) Points Allowed: 22.0 (better) So… in ten trials each, it looks like a more normal blitz somehow actually generates slightly better pass rush than does a heavy multi-player blitz attack. Is there something I’m missing here? Too small a sample size? It simply boggles the mind… might it be that a nearly-always blitzing team becomes more predictable and the offense adjusts better to it? (That seems to be veering a good ways toward real football more than FOF logic, but I’m grasping at straws here) I think I’m done for right now… I may run another version with a rarely-blitzing team, and see where that goes. Here is the Excel table with my test results thus far (just these two series, but the full analysis is here for you to see). Wilson 335 Defense Testing Last edited by QuikSand : 10-04-2007 at 01:45 PM. |
|
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 01:26 PM
|
#29 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Ok then.
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 03:07 PM
|
#30 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Did one more round of tests, using the same defense but an almost-never-blitz package, and predictably it was a little bit less effective in rushing the passer, and was a little bit less effective overall against the pass. I will repost the Excel testing template, in the off chance anyone is interested.
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 03:08 PM
|
#31 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
And now it turns out there is an apparent bug in the calculated PR% value for a team in its "Team Summary" data, which only counts a sack as worth 1/10 of its expected/intended value. Looks like this round of testing... like others before it... is approaching worthlessness.
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 03:25 PM
|
#32 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Anyway - I'm now a bit interested in this team, but my guess is that my vision for having multiple people pick up the files and start fiddling with it just isn't going to happen. So, what makes the most sense from here, to anyone reading?
-Just scrap the participatory and playtesting crap and play it as a standard dynasty -Keep doing the testing work on your own, dumbass, and just tell me what the results are so I can make my own teams and gameplans better -Something else? |
|
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 03:29 PM
|
#33 |
|
College Starter
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Roseville, CA
|
I'd like to see the testing work and plan to help out when I get some time this weekend.
Not sure what I can offer, being a real novice to the game, but I'd like to jump in and learn some of the finer points. Last edited by rjolley : 10-04-2007 at 03:29 PM. |
|
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 04:01 PM
|
#34 |
|
College Prospect
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Inland Empire, PRC
|
quiksand, i love reading all of your dynasties and i don't have any fof at the moment, so i read your dynasties.
|
|
|
|
|
10-04-2007, 08:14 PM
|
#35 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
I think I will have some time tomorrow to do a bit more. Maybe I will try some more conventional defenses -- I think the personnel basically dictate a 3-4 front, but we may try out a more conventional 3-4 and see if that improves on the novelty 3-3-5 base (I suspect it will, as I'm increasingly convinced that "unusual" or "emphasizing" are not good things to have associated with one's gameplan).
Will go over and take a look at the offense, as well. Might try out SkyDog's publicly available Run and Short Pass offense, without all the emphasis on the 2TE formations -- again, I suspect that in an effort to try to develop a personality for this team, I'm likely just crippling them. The fact that we don't really have a lot to bring to the table at the TE position might play some role there also. |
|
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 01:01 PM
|
#36 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Well, here’s one test result that at least stands the common sense test, to me. I have tested this team’s defense using a pretty standard 3-4 defense, and basically found what I might have expected. Compared to the balanced-blitz version of the 3-3-5, a base 3-4 is a little better against the run, but not as strong against the pass. My indication is that, at least for this team, the 3-3-5 is a better fit – but it would be very hard to reach any global conclusion, I think.
Anyway – the testing template is revised, at the same location linked above. |
|
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 03:24 PM
|
#37 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Some Offensive Testing
Now I think I’m done, for now at least, with testing various styles of defenses. The inability to get a good handle on the pass rush effectiveness has taken the wind out of my sails, you might say. I’ll switch to offense, and see how that goes. In short, I tested three offensive schemes, all in keeping generally with the concept of this team. We have QB Blaine in as the starter in all these setups, incidentally. And I’m using the medium-blitz version of the 3-3-5 defense, as that seems to be the Goldilocks spot with blitzing, as so often the case seems necessary in FOF. -Five different offenses, ten trials of each: WPW Doublewing, as distributed SkyDog’s Run and Short Pass Offense A “Don’t Lose Game” offense with running and very safe passing A DLG with emphasis on rushing – about 60% in main situations A tweaked version of the WPW Doublewing, with more short passing There are arguments for and against contracting the passing game – it can add some stability to the offense (fewer zero plays with higher completion percentage) but can certainly be ineffective in many situations as well. And with our offensive talent, we’re still not fielding a very complete team – we are sputtering quite a lot with this offense, I know. Anyway – I end up deciding that the basic WPW Doublewing is pretty much the way to go for this team right now. We don’t really have the mighty blocking to make this a team that can run the ball even when the other team knows it’s coming, so we need some balance. Offensive testing results uploaded to: http://www.fof-ihof.com/upload/QuikS...se_testing.xls |
|
|
|
|
10-05-2007, 09:58 PM
|
#38 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2010 Season
After all the scrambling and the testing, I’m basically back to where I thought I’d be for this season – we’re going to run the Doublewing offense, basically as I sent it out, and we’re going to run the 3-3-5 Minwage defense, albeit with blitzing scaled back pretty significantly. My general sense here is that these schemes give this team a decent chance to keep games in control – and that is my main approach here. We don’t yet have quality talent across the roster, but we’re working toward that goal as well, obviously. The scouting team says that Carl Blaine is “the guy” for the QB position, and I ran all my tests with him in there. I’m going with him. His overall rating is a measly 6/52, putting his current ratings practically at zero in most areas, but I don’t think we gain anything by investing more time with either of our other guys here. Blaine is the only one of the trio who has any hope of being a long term answer for this team, so he simply has to get his shot here. And our testing, if nothing else has proven that this is not a playoff team or anything – if the test results bear out in the “real” season ahead, we probably can expect between 3-5 wins and a slot in the top handful in the upcoming draft. On defense, I really don’t know how I’m going to play rookie creeper Walt Haynes, who looks like a guy who can develop into a pretty decent all-around LB. He is too light too move to an inside slot, so my plan is to basically use him as a fairly frequent reserve at both the strong and weak side spots. With that – I feel our main roster issues are fairly resolved. I’ll play out the full season, with injuries restored back to 150, and manage the team as best I can. I won’t be gameplanning week by week, but I will attend to injuries, rather than just leave the staff in charge of the depth chart. Wow. We open with a 30-3 win, fueled by TWO defensive touchdowns courtesy of rookie Nate Gunn. I’m a little jaded by “running” this season a zillion times at this point, but now that it’s official, that was kind of cool. No need to get carried away – we still stink, demonstrated by an ugly series of games right after the opening win. Middle of the season, a couple of our roster situations get murky due to injuries – we have to bring in Irv Borders to play QB for a few games, and he leads us to a couple of wins. And SLB Cornell Dennis gets hurt, so we get to see Walt Haynes in a full-time role for a while. And when we bring back Dennis, he gets re-injured, out for the year, so Haynes is going to end up with something like 12 starts. Meanwhile, Irv Borders has posted an 80.7 passer rating (and a 3-2 record), to Blaine’s 73.6 rating (and 1-3 record), making a healthy Blaine a bit challenging. I decide to give Borders one more start – it’s bad, and we bring back Blaine who leads us to a nice win. Okay. That moment at 5-7 is really the height of the season – we tumble the next two, and sneak out one more win but end on a losing note. Six wins is a relative success for this team, of course. Code:
Those numbers are still those of a team that is barely able to keep up with the competition – so it’s not like we’re a playoff team that took some unlucky breaks to miss out on the playoff hunt. We’re a bad team. However, we did post a pretty respectable “controlled” passing offense. Behind these two young QBs, we ended up with 21 picks, and that’s trouble for this style of offense, but at least we are connecting on a pretty high share of our passes. The running game got 4 yards a carry, which is okay, though obviously not special. Only a few guys posting pass rush numbers, but Fisk and Bierria are both effective, it seems. DE Jimmie Leatherwood was in for DE Bucky Walton for most of the year, and played pretty well, probably making the case for an extended chance. Our MLB Pierce posted big tackle numbers again, anchoring the defense all season, and SLB Haynes put up good ones too in a largely starting role. Nate Gunn hit the ground running with two big fumbles, and posted a very nice 11/37 ratio of PD/Catches, while Kim Rood posted 11 PDs, but yielded 59 catches. Both are going to be fine, of course, I’m not at all worried. After an injury to our starter at FS, I put in rookie Irv Donovan, who actually posted very solid numbers in a half-season of work: 6 PD/12 catches, 3 interceptions for a PD% of 86.6 – and 25+9 tackles. We may actually give him some looks next year, as he does have some upside, it appears. We are shut out of the season awards, no surprise. |
|
|
|
|
10-06-2007, 06:22 AM
|
#39 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2011 Offseason
Okay, we head into a new season looking to make some “impact” additions. I don’t really know what we ought to do at QB, though I feel like we let that option really slip away last year. (Though Quinn Hall, currently rated 22/62, is angry sitting on the bench for Warren’s Corners after they traded up to select him at 1.2) Basically, we sit at picks 1.2 and 1.8 this year – again very much in position to make a serious and immediate impact on the team. Where do I feel like we still have starting lineup slots basically up for grabs? Not that many. OFFENSE -- QB is unsettled. I like our RBs, but we’re not getting a lot of production, and adding a top-tier guy could change everything. Tight end is unsettled, on a team nominally designed to use the TE a lot, we’re getting very little production from ours. WR is an area where we are subpar, but I don’t feel like it’s a top priority, exactly. DEFENSE – We may stand to gain one more pass rushing DE. At LB, we have some creepers, but would benefit from a stud addition. At safety, a ready-to-go player could give us a boost over some of the creeper types who figure to start as of now. Curiously, the top draft pick from last year, CB Jerald Quinones, is back in this draft, after Tonawanda couldn’t get him signed. I didn’t see if there was a cap problem there – I resume there was. A few other throwbacks in here, too – kinda disappointing to see. |
|
|
|
|
10-06-2007, 06:23 AM
|
#40 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2011 Draft
Okay, the 4th-rated QB on the draft list comes back VU by my scout, posted a top score of 40 on the test, and was agile at the combine, plus he’s among the most-developed QBs in the draft. Might make a good target – his lousy ratings do include a big bar for the short pass, and pretty good for accuracy. He might be just the sort for us to target, perhaps in early round two. However, among the top-tier impact players in this draft – I see greatness at DE, WR, and CB, but not really any of the slots that would excite me. I like a few of the running backs here, but not enough to sink a top pick into them. We may again be trading down. I work out a deal with Pendleton – they move up to #2, and we move down to #10. We pick up their 2nd rounder this year, and their first and fourth rounders next year for the move – they likely get an impact DE (I expect the top CB Quinones will go #1 again, though I guess it could be either order) and we ought to get three solid players out of this swap. I do not, however, think that we are likely to use either of these top first rounders on an offensive player – it’s just not the draft to do that. Pendleton surprises me and takes the second CB, but he’s another player I didn’t want to take this high, given our needs. There’s a combine beast of a LB available here for us, and I simply don’t see how we can pass him up at pick #8. Whether he displaces our currently 30/30 creeper at MLB or perhaps goes over to play SLB, he looks like a complete monster, though not a standout pass rusher. CB Howard Milgate is another perfect addition to our style of run-stopping defensive backs, and whether he plays as a safety or as a full-time nickel back (in this defense that’s a starter) he looks fabulous. Code:
So, with two early second rounders, I’m hoping to land a RB and hopefully our target quarterback. But after the first round ends, my QB Pete Mason is sitting right at the top of the big board. I decide not to panic, and it pays off – he makes it to our pick at 2.8, where I take him. I really hope he turns out to be a team-changing pick – better-developed than our current creeper, and maybe with a few more usable skills. But he is not a big-bars type of guy, and comes aboard looking like a shaky 18/40. My guess is that anything short of a +3 move in camp spells a miss here, once again. At this point, with a few of the top RBs gone from the board, I think my favorite guy left is likely to fall another round. And since he’s a low-endurance guy, it’s not crisis if he doesn’t fall. I decide to target instead the top offensive tackle from this draft – a combine standout I didn’t think I’d have any chance to draft, and so I didn’t even interview him, but he looks like a run-blocker first, and perhaps a very good fit for us. My RB indeed falls to our third round pick, and this draft is playing out beautifully. Now, we just need to get some of these guys to turn into real players, and we’ll be okay. Would have preferred to have landed some impact players for our offense instead, I guess, but can’t complain here. I swing a deal sending the 2012 4th rounder from Pendleton plus our 6th this year to move up to take a FB my scout liked, a guy with a great run-blocking skill. My thinking is that if he pans out, we might end up using FB Brant Baldridge as a TE this year, and let the rookie do the lead run blocking. In round five, I spin the wheel with a safety who seems like a combine standout, but has no ratings. I overlooked him in interviews, but I’m intrigued enough to overlook the fact that his skills profile is exactly what I generally don’t want – all coverage, no run defense or interception skills. We’ll see. He makes a quick move to cornerback, where his coverage skills are better placed. Last pick goes on a combine skipper at LB who, if he develops, has a nice skill profile for a pass rusher at either the sam or willie slot in our defense. So, immediately after the draft ends, we get a funny trade offer. It’s Goat Island, and they are offering us the much-traveled Pendleton 4th next year for none other than QB Carl Blaine. They see he is developing, obviously, and are interested. Does that trade make sense for us? For a 4th? A 4th isn’t much, but the thing is this – if we’re going to go with our rookie we drafted high this year, then Blaine sits on the bench, un-mentored, and rots. And after a couple years backing up, we let him walk, not much better than where he is (10.55, incidentally). Is he worth more than a 4th? Likely. Will I get a better offer? Doubtful. |
|
|
|
|
10-06-2007, 06:36 AM
|
#41 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Here’s a pic of our LB corps (yes, “corps” – not “core”) and a snapshot of our dilemma. This is, actually, one of the age-old issues for me when playing out a career like this (empty cupboard) that I end up getting guys I like as nice little creepers, but eventually they get washed out by big-bar studs. Great case in point below:
 So, we have two pretty nice creepers in Pierce (whose effectiveness is easy to see on the stat pages of each season) and Haynes (who now I think has leapt past the disappointing Dennis to become our starter at SLB). Bierria I include just to show the sort of player I’m “getting by with” at the WLB slot, by design. So, we draft a very good looking LB in Knapp – the 84 future despite fairly low pass rush technique tells me he’s likely close to topped-out elsewhere. So, he ought to be really good. So… whom should he replace? He ought to be a major improvement at either SILB or SLB, better nominally against the run and the pass. I’m happy with the draft pick, but this is the tough call. |
|
|
|
|
10-07-2007, 08:35 AM
|
#42 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
So, we turn down the trade offer for QB Blaine – until we see how the rookie comes through camp, I don’t feel that a marginal pick is enough compensation for that gamble. A 2nd or 3rdd rounder might have done it, but a day two pick seems too close to pocket lint.
I’m finally getting to the point with this team where I no longer really want to just drop a lure in and grab twenty or thirty rookies after the draft – I suspect we have room for maybe five to eight guys to make this team, but only a serious creeper or a perfect skills match is likely to see playing time for us. We have 47 guys signed (including all our draft picks) going into late free agency, so it’s not like we have a ton of vacancies sitting out there – and there are a number of returning players who are at least worth considering to return in reserve roles (key guys were re-signed in early FA, of course). So, into camp we go… Here is the revised picture of the draft – with the resulting ratings movement from camp included, alongside the base data. Oh, and I decide to keep Knapp as basically our MLB (technically slotting him at SILB for our 3-4 front). Given his one weakness is in pass rushing, I think the middle ought to be the best fit overall. Code:
|
|
|
|
|
10-07-2007, 08:36 AM
|
#43 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
And here is the total picture of the training camp movements:
Well, we took a loss with our top pick at LB, but he is so well-developed that he’s surely going to be what we wanted – a massive improvement right up the middle. FS Howardd Milgate is also going to be an impact addition, I think, though his run defense isn’t very filled-in and that’s some cause for worry. QB Pete Mason isn’t terribly exciting-looking right now, but there are two really good things to see here. First is that he jumped +4 in camp, boding well for future development. Second is that he seems to be hiding a pretty good “avoid interceptions” rating to add up to his current rating of 20, which is very good for what I want to get out of my QB position. So… if he’s a short passing specialist, who won’t make the big interceptions, has potential for good ratings in accuracy, sensing the rush, and scrambling out of trouble – this looks like exactly the sort of guy I have been looking for. Bullseye. Lock it up, this is our guy. We had two other free agent quarterbacks also creep, which is nice, but I have no idea what I might do with either of them. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
10-08-2007, 08:56 AM
|
#44 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Oh, another minor note – we have a trade offer of a 3rd round pick for WR Tyrell Curtis. No deal, of course. Wish it was for our backup QB instead.
Anyway, as I get set for this season, I thought I’d toss out a few more pics – if this isn’t going to be genuinely participatory (as in people getting the game files to tinker themselves) then I’ll at least make some of my decisions a little more transparent. This year – it’s our complement of players among the backs and tight ends who I’ll profile and discuss. Supposedly, this is a TE and FB friendly team, so I’d like to get a handle on what we’re doing here. After this rookie class, we have a bit more talent in the mix to work with.  Okay, there’s the main complement of guys we will be using in the rotation this year. I’m pretty happy overall with them, but the question is, in part, whom to use where. Running backs Marble and Logan both look pretty good, though neither one really made a “creep” upward as I would have hoped to see. But between them, I feel pretty good about our primary ball carrier options. I wish there were a way to tinker with who gets the ball in what situation – it seems to me that we have a decent “Mr. Inside” Marble and “Mr. Outside” Mason setup, but I don’t think we can effect that in this game. FB Baldridge is the flex player in this group. Last year, he played pure FB, which is fine – but that yields pretty uninspiring results for a pretty good player – 50 targets and no carries (though he did get 29 carries in his first year). His 37 KROs is an indication to me that the FB is primarily a blocker in this system, and that maybe Baldridge is getting pass targets in part due to his good route running rating. So… would we be better off using the rookie Parmely at the FB position? He’s a solid run blocker, and is pretty good against the blitz – that’s mostly what I look for in my serious leagues (where the FB is as much of an afterthought position as any on the whole team). So, if I started Parmely at FB, then I’d want to play Baldridge at TE. Ahead of whom, exactly? Maybe he would be our #1. Deutsch is a former creeper who seems to be finished at a pretty much replacement-level, and with practically nothing at getting downfield, he doesn’t seem capable of making plays with the short passing focus – so maybe Baldridge would be the best option we have at TE. And TE Rod Rhodes is not a creeper, but he definietly is a solid skills match. He’s pretty much what I’d like to see as a backup TE on a team where I’m trying to economize at that sort of position – decent blocker, won’t steal away lots of targets from the better players, but can help is the ball does float his way. So, maybe the best slotting is Baldridge #1, and Rhodes #2 here, and let the creeper die on the vine now that he has stopped his upward development. I confess that I don’t have much idea what good a solid FB is when used as a RB—but that’s another option for Baldridge, especially if one of the two top guys gets hurt. My sense is that you lose the “explosiveness” from the position, but can be okay in grinding it out, which might not be too bad. |
|
|
|
|
10-08-2007, 11:17 AM
|
#45 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2011 Season Testing
So, I decide to accept my staff recommendations for the RB setup – that puts Mr. outside Mason in as the starter, and Mr. Inside Marble as the backup and the selected RB for all the special situations. With playing time set to 75%, and Mason sporting a low endurance, my guess is the two guys end up with a pretty even split of carries. And for the fourth straight season, we have a new guy starting at QB. However, I now have confidence that the guy in there is the long term guy, not just the flavor of the month. I’ll run the season ten times without injuries, to try to get a feel for what we can expect of this offense. And then, I might try out some variations – I’m intrigued to see whether a low-ability, low-RR guy at flanker might help this offense, by getting more targets to the guys who count. And I might flip things at TE and run that as well. With my base setup, this looks like a 6-win team, and our rushing game is getting better – up to about 4.2 yards per carry. We’re still pretty negative in turnover margin – in time, I hope to see that improve, but for right now, I’m not surprised to see it still pretty high. Hmmm… I’ll do a comparison of the RB performances for the two co-starters: Code:
One thing I find pretty interesting is the fumble totals. I mean – here are the results from ten full seasons, and I’m still not sure how confident I might be in reaching the conclusion that Marble is more prone to fumbling than is Logan. he coughed it up 60 times in 10 seasons, but Logan did 45. With the rating now hidden in the game, we’re supposed to be able to make judgments about this based on results – but I have to wonder how reasonable that is, really. In ten full-season trials, I think I would have noticed something alarming about Marble’s relative fumbling only twice – in seasons #2 (8 to 3) and #5 (9 to 4). In every other trial, I don’t think I could have reached any real conclusion about whether one guy is a problem on that front. Troubling, to me. As for rushing effectiveness – tough to judge across the different roles – like most people, I sort of expect that the backup RB is going to put up pretty big numbers, so perhaps seeing Marble’s numbers only looking slightly better than Logan’s (Marble at about 4.35 and Logan at about 4.05) means they are more or less a wash in overall effectiveness. Maybe. The fact that Marble is in for both short-yardage situations as well as passing situations might offset that expectation a bit, I reckon. Okay, first test will be to run the same team, same offense, but slot in FB Baldridge at fullback instead of TE. In the first setup, Baldridge posted decent but not spectacular numbers for a tight end – typically about 300 yards receiving on something like 5.5 yards per target. That doesn’t wow me, so I’ll try things out with this guy – who really seems like a nearly-perfect FB – as a lead blocker instead. We’ll see if that makes a big difference for the lead running backs. My base depth chart from above was: FB Parmely, Baldridge TE Baldridge, Rhodes And now I will move to: FB Baldridge, Parmely TE Rhodes, Deutsch We’ll see – it would seem that we are improving at FB,a dn dropping a bit at TE, so I might expect to see the running game gat a little bit of a spark, perhaps. Dunno if it would be enough to notice in only ten trials, though. The first and biggest conclusion I can reach from this experiment is that, at least with the degrees of player quality I’m talking about here – this switch doesn’t affect the team at all. There is no way to separate the results in yards per carry (moved from 4.18 to 4.20), yards per reception (5.84 to 5.83), wins (5.60 to 5.80), or anything else obvious from the two setups. Maybe if I plugged in a complete no-talent at FB we’d see a dropoff, but it appears that the FB/TE switch is just nibbling around the edges here, which doesn’t come as a major surprise. One area where we did see some change, though, is with turnovers – moving FB Baldgridge moves us down from about 30 turnovers a season to about 24 – a seemingly meaningful shift of about 5.5 a game, and (in part) moving our net turnover margin from –6.8 to +2.4. Tough to know if that’s just statistical noise, or if it’s perhaps something material. Perhaps more testing ahead. |
|
|
|
|
10-08-2007, 03:17 PM
|
#46 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
One last test with the offense – I am going to try swapping out WR Moungey, who has been our FL starter so far. In his stead, I want to try out Randal Blake – a modest creeper guy (might be done creeping) who has only a 6/10 in route running. Theory here is to minimize the downfield stuff that go to our “off” receiver (Blake is 21/26 overall) and emphasize the stuff we get to 47/51 Tyrell Curtis. I’m not convinced getting Moungey a lot of targets is that good for this team, overall. We’ll see if this seems to matter.
The ten seasons run with Moungey demoted to reserve didn’t show a whole lot – we did win more games that cycle (6.5), but I don’t see anything else to suggest there’s much real there. The turnover margin was nearly dead even, and the offense was down around 25 a year – supporting the numbers I saw from the cycle using Baldridge at FB. I think I will officially adopt this as my gameplan for the season ahead – we will keep Baldridge slotted as our starting FB, but I think I will slot him as the #2 TE as well, getting our rookie FB Parmeley some playing time as well, and basically demoting TE Deutsch to “nobody” status. I think my next step will be to run the official 2011 season, and we’ll go from there. Absent any compelling argument that we ought to be doing something in particular otherwise, I guess that makes sense. |
|
|
|
|
10-08-2007, 03:18 PM
|
#47 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 02:03 PM
|
#48 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2011 Season
I decide to keep Baldridge at FB, bench WR Moungey (well, place him at FL2, where he will still get playing time) and go on with the season. based on test results, I think this is more or less a 5-11 team – we’ll see how well things unfold, with Pete in at QB hopefully for the long haul. We open with two pretty impressive wins. Hmmmm. Things comer back to earth a bit, but the team once again pretty comfortably out-performs what I would have expected from the no-injury testing. I wonder if we are deeper than the average team, perhaps? Regardless, we get badly beat up with injuries, but muddle through to a very solid 8-8 record and a lot of hope for the future. Code:
Interestingly, we had some mid-season gains among young players worth noting – CB Kim Rood, who was looking like the lesser of our CB tandem, broke out this year and filled up to a massive 84/84 rating (with no return abilities to boost that_ -- he now looks like a nearly perfect cover man. And C Emmitt Dawkins is now maxed-out in his visible ratings in run and pass blocking, making him an 83/83 overall. Both bode well, of course. Here’s a snapshot of Pete Mason as we wrap up season one:  …my guess is that he will keep building on this year, and continue to develop. Bad news is that our RT Andre Jammer, he of the power run blocking, looks like he may be done. He’s listed as out for 32 weeks with a degenerative hip condition, that’s one I don’t think he will make it back from. So OT may be a need area, or else we will be moving our rookie LT Jones over to become a new starter at RT (pretty likely). Again – nothing for us in the player awards list, so we’ll move on and see where we stand in 2012. Last edited by QuikSand : 10-09-2007 at 02:04 PM. |
|
|
|
|
10-09-2007, 02:31 PM
|
#49 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
Early 2012 Player Movement
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
10-10-2007, 08:50 AM
|
#50 |
|
lolzcat
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Annapolis, Md
|
2012 Offseason
We head into a new season – first thing to watch is the movement of players as we start the FA period. That summary is in the preceding post (formatting purposes). +3 for Pete Mason – that’s good to see. A variety of ups and downs elsewhere – mixed bag. -5 for CB Kim Rood. Make up your mind, pal. Anyway, we get our key free agents signed, and are on to the rookie draft. We hold picks at #6 and #18, so not quite the prime slots of the past few years, and my guess is that our trading-down days are behind us. In preparing, with pick 1.6, I am thinking that we will be tempted by a topped-out offensive lineman, likely a tackle. I reckon the top pick will be the #1 RB in the draft, and after the one stud QB here, it looks like OT is the deep position – so going LT would likely be a BPA move for us anyway. There is one stud CB who is ranked down at #9 overall on the big board – and I can’t help but wonder how good our pass defense might get with a **fourth** stud back there, but it’s not really in our best interests, I don’t think, to go there while we are so strong already. When three QBs go ahead of us, we have the pick of all but the first OT, and that leaves us with two guys we really like at OT. No chance either would last toi pick #18, so it’s go time. When my top CB pick is still on the board at pick #10, I’m getting antsy, and when he falls to pick 14, I have to at least try to go and get him. We give up our 3rd and 5th rounders to move up four slots, and land a guy I pretty seriously considered for pick 1.6. Wow. In round two, I want to go TE (to actively pursue this offense’s supposed focus) but again can’t find anyone I really like enough to take here. I am not ignoring the position on purpose. My scout didn’t like this guy, but WR Sherman Kiner seems like a good fit for our fickle flanker position, so I go after him and hope for the best. Code:
After the long wait, we are in fill-in mode with out final picks. LB Mohammad was a scout favorite, and the last two look like skill fits with decent combines to back them up. Nothing terribly exciting there. Notes for after-draft pickups, while still in sortable draft mode: DE Trent Alcala – 10-02 jump, 33 test – smart jumping guy on the D-line? CB Brock Burnett – 6.94 agil, 36 test FS Ed Whigham – 43 test score, scout says VU TE Seth Pickard – solid receiving bars LB Rickey Schultz – skip, intriguing bars for WLB maybe |
|
|
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
