Good Article on Overrating Rookies

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by PGaither84

Right, because the guy "EXPERTS" feel is one of the best prospects in this years draft won't be very good SIMPLY because he is a rookie. Rookies never come in and play at an elite level. Especially guys like Randy Moss, Patrick Willi, AP, Ronnie Lott and many others don't come in at play at All-Pro/All-Star levels. Please, tell me what ratings do you think are overinflated?

To me, the OVR ratings are a bit inflated on the whole. I can see a RARE prospect like Luck being in the 80s, considering that he has been touted as the best thing since Manning or Elway. However, that does NOT mean that every other player should be scaled down starting at that point. For instance, I have Luck and Griffin far above the 3rd best prospect, Kalil, who is 4 points behind Griffin and 6 behind Luck. Griffin's upside and athletic ability has made him rare. Luck's combination of accuracy, knowledge, and athletic skills have warranted him his rating as well. However, these are all capable of changing depending on camps and games. So to me, having one or two players above and beyond happens.

However, the falloff from this should be evident. No draft has had, IMO, the top 32 picks with ratings all above 70. That depth to me is unheard of. If EA was sticking with 70 being an "average" player, then these prospects who have not even yet been to a team facility would most likely not be on the same level as an average pro. Now maybe after a training camp and a few games the gap could close, but that is, once again, rare.

I take more issue with the attributes. Blackmon a 95 speed??? REALLY??? One of the biggest knocks on him even before he ran at his pro day (that's simply looking at the film) was his speed an inability to separate against elite CBs with superior athletic ability. To me, EA simply gets it wrong with all of their ratings, both OVR and attribute numbers.

Finally, the guys you mention are EXTREMELY rare and may be (if not already are) HOFers. But was Moss an 85 before he even flew to MIN to meet Dennis Green? Was Willis an 85 before he even got his playbook? Right before the draft I had Willis as a 71...9th best in his draft class. By the end of the year, he was an 84 in my system. I think that is fair. Why? Because he PROVED his ability during his pro bowl rookie season.

To me, all rookies should start lower than their NFL counterparts until they PROVE how they played. The funny thing about the draft is all of these guys are unproven. Everyone is at first. That is why it's a crap shoot. The ones who DO prove themselves deserve higher ratings, but only after they show they can consistently do it at a higher rating worthy of their play. Am I going to rate Nick Perry an 80 simply because he is expected to beat out Walden, Jones, and Zombo for the starting ROLB position for the Packers even tho the other 3 are in the mid-high 70s? NO! It's not because he CAN'T beat them, but rather because he has not proven it yet. Once (or if) he does in camp or the pre-season or whenever, only then should his rating increase. The proof should be in the pudding. Don't you agree?

[justud]

Quote: Originally Posted by PGaither84

Right, because the guy "EXPERTS" feel is one of the best prospects in this years draft won't be very good SIMPLY because he is a rookie. Rookies never come in and play at an elite level. Especially guys like Randy Moss, Patrick Willi, AP, Ronnie Lott and many others don't come in at play at All-Pro/All-Star levels. Please, tell me what ratings do you think are overinflated?

1. If i had a dollar for every time "the experts" were totally off i'd be rich...lets remember most of them agreed with Alex Smith being #1 in 2005 over Rogers. I also remember hearing about how quickly Braylon Edwards would be a superstar. Did you read the article? You named four guys who excelled when the vast majority of players don't fall into that category. Most rookies don't contribute until Year 2 and 3.

i'd like to see once-in-a-decade players come in at 70 (at the highest) and everyone else in the 60s and the 50s. can the players who actually perform get a lil love? lets stop acting like being an NFL starter is some easy thing. it kills me when people try to act like player like Kuechly will be good based on what he did at BC. sure worked for jamarcus, alex smith and braylon....right?

when you have your special talents? fine. update their ratings by roster update but it hurts the game when we allow the rookies to be overrated just because people want to play with them.