Rate this Player (Blind Rating Taste Test)

[SIMstyle]

Quote: Originally Posted by DUDERMAN

It's fairly obvious who your player is, though I won't be the one to give it away. I don't think it's fair to judge him on anything but last year. He should be a mid 80 based on last year. I personally use profootballfocus to help me adjust ratings. That way it's more accurate than the "ratings czar" or my own opinions.

We use PFF too. i appreciate you not saying who it is. i disagree tho, waiting for a player to have a big year/start isn't the way I rate...half of the league would have zero ratings that way. everyone has to have a rating and his would have been a mid tier bench player (63-65ish) after his first two years.

he wouldn't have sniffed the mid 80s with me either...i need to see 3 years of consistently high numbers for that (or an outstanding rookie year, i rated Randy Moss, Dwight Freeney and AP 88's after year one) when i think 85 I used to think Hines Ward (he's an 82 now) now James Farrior is my prototype for an 85 rated guy.

[gohogsfan14]

Well if the player is hurt all the time and thats the reason for the low number of carries then i think lowering the rating is justified but if they become a starter and instantly produce like that then i think they deserve a higher rating...not their fault the coach wouldnt play them lol

[phillysouljah]

lol it's so obvious who he is because it's a guy with a unique career progression who has been relevant in fantasy football.

By Madden standards, I'd say an 80. Last season could be seen as an aberration but considering the existing spread of Madden players, his performance was still good enough that it's hard to warrant a 75 which may be more in line for a guy who was not relevant previously.

However, knowing what team he is on and the fact that defenses have to worry about the passing game more and knowing about how he played (WHICH IS WHY YOU SHOULDN'T BASE RATINGS ON STATS ALONE )... 75.

His good numbers last year had everything to do with defenses worried more about other threats, especially in the redzone, and he received boosts from the team taking big leads and running out the clock.

His circumstance was the reason for his big year. His raw ability would likely only give him more middling numbers.

[shnuskis]

So who is your prototypical average running back, just for comparison sake to our mystery back?

[SIMstyle]

Quote: Originally Posted by Yrogergj24

86 overall

wow...thats 4 points from elite with one good year. so i'm guessing you'd give a guy like Jerry Rice (9 straight years with 1,200 yards receiving and atleast 9 TDs) about what? 150 or so? you don't think 86 is a bit high?

refer to the legend again...you need 3 years of high stats to exceed 85 unless you come out of the gate your rookie year with big numbers.

[SIMstyle]

Quote: Originally Posted by gohogsfan14

Well if the player is hurt all the time and thats the reason for the low number of carries then i think lowering the rating is justified but if they become a starter and instantly produce like that then i think they deserve a higher rating...not their fault the coach wouldn't play them lol

i hear you, bro. here's the thing: we can only rate whats there and we don't want to rationalize for the player and say "its not his fault" or "he couldnt play" nothing subjective if you can help it. numbers will lie...but they tell the truth if you look INTO them.

i'm shocked no one asked about how his team did...no one was concerned whether he was performing for a winner or not?

[dougdeuce]

Unfair, cause I know who it is, but either way I think he's a mid 70's. 74 would be appropriate.

[gohogsfan14]

I think his receiving numbers should be taken into account as well when comparing him to other players