Good Article on Overrating Rookies

[justud]

check it out: http://spgmg.blogspot.com/2012/03/hi...g-rookies.html

[Big FN Deal]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

L-O-V-E-D, loved it! lol

Somebody tweet that link to Donny Moore and the EA football ratings "team".

[tiloj]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

Eh, honestly in the last few years offensive rookies have accelerated their learning curve substantially.

Rookie quarterbacks, wide receivers, and linemen have improved their play via coaching techniques by leaps and bounds over the past 5-10 years.

Simply put, coaches have figured out how to harness potential and physical ability far better than they did only a decade ago. A player like Andy Dalton or Cam Newton might have flopped in 1990, but today? They are stars in the making.

This coupled with rules changes that ease these rookies into the game, and you are seeing monster seasons more often than ever from young players.

It is a different world, and that makes this article less accurate by the day.

[xblake16x]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

Its still accurate though. And its not just rookies, everyone needs to be rerated

[CpectorBon]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

honestly in the last few years offensive rookies have accelerated their learning curve substantially

[Big FN Deal]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

Eh, honestly in the last few years offensive rookies have accelerated their learning curve substantially.

Rookie quarterbacks, wide receivers, and linemen have improved their play via coaching techniques by leaps and bounds over the past 5-10 years.

Simply put, coaches have figured out how to harness potential and physical ability far better than they did only a decade ago. A player like Andy Dalton or Cam Newton might have flopped in 1990, but today? They are stars in the making.

This coupled with rules changes that ease these rookies into the game, and you are seeing monster seasons more often than ever from young players.

It is a different world, and that makes this article less accurate by the day.

Maybe I am becoming too full of myself when it comes to what is or is not NFL realistic but this post right here and the "likes" it has accrued, is baffling to me.

Essentially this post is stating that Dalton and Cam were nothing special but just a product of the current NFL environment for rookies and we should expect to see more rookies shine like this going forward. I completely disagree because the NFL will always be relative meaning things in the NFL change together. So if Dalton and Cam's rookie performances become the norm for rookie QB's then elite QB's will be having far greater performances meaning the "norm" should still be rated lower.

I am not understanding how the NFL has or will become a league where the vast majority of highly touted rookie players pan out their first year and become worthy of high initial Madden rookie ratings. In the article, the writer gave examples of a nice list of high rated rookies in Madden and the vast majority didn't turn out to deserve it.

Someone please explain to me what about today's NFL "makes this article less accurate by the day."

Also let me add, it is very difficult to have a clear discussion about ratings in Madden for any player because the OVR is alleged to be a value rating but a players OVR is universal for all teams.

[xblake16x]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

Not to mention two top 15 QB's who actually seemed to play worse as the season went on, Christian Ponder and Blaine Gabbert... so one of three first round QB's who saw significant playing time actually had a little bit of success? And all of a sudden the norm is to have success?

[DCEBB2001]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

First of all, I am not a big believer in what EA did regarding setting player overalls because of where they are drafted. Scouts often disagree with management on player skill, potential, and value. How else could a guy like Tebow have been selected in the 1st round with a near consensus mid-round grade? How is it that a guy like Aaron Rodgers with a top 5 grade falls into the mid 20s?

It seems to me that when EA comes out with their "live" player ratings during the draft, they simply take where they are selected and assign a value. If that was the case then Gabbert (2011), Alualu (2010), Crabtree (2009), and McKelvin (2008), would have had the same draft grades, which was not the case.

EA just doesn't use quality data to interpolate ratings. Teams miss on players, draft them too high, or allow other talents to fall. It is not an exact science, but I tend to trust the scouts over The Czar's ratings.

Now, as for inflated rookie ratings, in the FBG system rookies are not capped or kept above a minimum. They are simply rated based upon the data. Here is how the top 10 players for each class graded out in recent years:

2010:
1 BRADFORD Sam 74
2 SUH Ndamukong 73
3 OKUNG Russell 73
4 McCOY Gerald 73
5 PIERRE-PAUL Jason 70
6 BERRY Eric 69
7 WILLIAMS Trent 69
8 MORGAN Derrick 68
9 BULAGA Bryan 68
10 SPILLER C.J. 67
250 MINOR Brandon 54

2009:
1 STAFFORD Matthew 70
2 SMITH Jason 70
3 CURRY Aaron 70
4 SANCHEZ Mark 69
5 CRABTREE Michael 69
6 SMITH Andre 69
7 RAJI B.J. 68
8 ORAKPO Brian 68
9 MAUALUGA Rey 68
10 MacLIN Jeremy 68
250 WILLIAMS Jaison 54

2008:
1 LONG Jake 74
2 LONG Chris 74
3 GHOLSTON Vernon 73
4 DORSEY Glen 72
5 ELLIS Sedric 71
6 HARVEY Derrick 71
7 RYAN Matt 70
8 MENDENHALL Rashad 70
9 McFADDEN Darren 70
10 BROHM Brian 70
250 LISTIRTI Brad 54

2007:
1 JOHNSON Calvin 79
2 THOMAS Joe 75
3 PETERSON Adrian 73
4 QUINN Brady 73
5 HALL Leon 72
6 LANDRY LaRon 72
7 CARRIKER Adam 71
8 RUSSELL Jamarcus 71
9 WILLIS Patrick 71
10 OKOYE Amobi 71
250 BISHOP Desmond 53

2006:
1 BUSH Reggie 76
2 LEINHART Matt 75
3 DAVIS Vernon 74
4 HAWK A.J. 72
5 FERGUSON D'Brickashw 71
6 WILLIAMS Mario 71
7 HUFF Mike 71
8 CUTLER Jay 71
9 YOUNG Vincent 71
10 BUNKLEY Broderick68
250 PINEGAR Paul 53

As you can see, some drafts are top heavy. Some have large drop offs even by the 10th pick. Some drafts are very, very deep. I give the 250th (near the back end of the draft) to illustrate how far the talent drops off in my system based on scouting data. The difference is quite large. To me, it is not that players come into the league rated as an "86", and drop like Reggie Bush did, but rather, it is that they come in much lower and either ADVANCE to a higher grade (rating), or simply stay stagnant. It is unlikely that players actually get worse from playing in the NFL. Instead, I posit that they actually just fail to meet lofty expectations and/or potential.

Now here is a look at this year's class.

2012:
1 LUCK Andrew 84
2 GRIFFIN Robert 82
3 KALIL Matt 78
4 POE Dontari 76
5 BLACKMON Justin 75
6 KIRKPATRICK Dre 73
7 KUECHLY Luke 72
8 CLAIBORNE Morris 72
9 COX Fletcher 72
10 DeCASTRO David72
250 PANNEL Deon'tae 58

All of the measurements are the same for each class. As we can see, the two prospects at the top are the highest I have had since Calvin Johnson in 2007. Their potential ability is high. I can see why EA has them rated as high as they are claiming, but it is not like every other player in the top 10 is in the 80s. In fact, the top 10 talent is only slightly better than that of 2007 and 2006. However, the depth this year is the highest it has every been for the top 250 players.

This system seems to me to allow for growth of rookie prospects, while also utilizing real comparable data from one to another, both in college and in the pros. Just my 2 cents.

[xblake16x]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

Overall doesn't matter really, and what they could do is just change the overall formula to satisfy the people who want lower overalls. What needs to happen is the actual ratings need to be spread out much more. Until someone consistently produces at a high level, their ratings shouldn't be at high levels.

[PGaither84]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

For those in favor of forcing rookies to have lower ratings SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY ARE ROOKIES... I have to ask if it is okay for EA to make those same players really good in the final roster update if they deserve it?

In Madden 08, did you want Patrick Willis to be below 86 OVR? Would you have been okay with making him a 96 OVR in a final roster update? How about Randy moss as a Rookie? If we were making Madden '99 this year [the '98 season] how low would you want rookie Randy Moss to be rated? What ratings would you have low to make his OVR low? After an explosive season, where would you want the final roster update to have him at?

If we want to have this conversation, don't just look at J. Russ and Tony Mandrich. Look at the stars as well.

I didn't have Madden at launch... what were Aldon Smith's initial ratings? He is an 88 OVR now with 97 Block Shedding and 99 Power moves now. Is that okay?

I understand not being happy that unproven players get a high rating, but is it REALLY that big of a deal? Also, what would you lower about RG3 to keep his rating down? Doesn't he deserve high athletic abilities? Doesn't he deserve a strong throwing power? Hasn't he shown that he is a very accurate passer? Isn't the big question mark how he will handle NFL speed and how good his decision making will be?

There is quote, but I don't remember exactly how it goes. Something like "it doesn't matter how many times you get knocked down... it matter how many times you get back up."

Here is how the top 10 players for each class graded out in recent years:

2007:
1 JOHNSON Calvin 79
2 THOMAS Joe 75
3 PETERSON Adrian 73
4 QUINN Brady 73
5 HALL Leon 72
6 LANDRY LaRon 72
7 CARRIKER Adam 71
8 RUSSELL Jamarcus 71
9 WILLIS Patrick 71
10 OKOYE Amobi 71
250 BISHOP Desmond 53

So, this was how you had them rated before a single down was played, or after a full season? Starting with his first game in the NFL, Willis was a beast. He had 174 tackles, 4 sacks , 2 forced fumbles, 5 pass deflections, was voted in as a starter to the Pro Bowl and was Defensive rookie of the year, NFL Linebacker of the year. He was a beast... so 71 OVR? He was one of the NFLs best linebackers as a rookie and only got better... and you have him as the 9th best rookie of 2007? You have him lower than Brady Quinn and on par with J. Russ? That's why it's really hard to take your ratings any more serious than EA's.

The fact is we shouldn't even care about OVR ratings... we should only care about positional skill ratings.

[RGiles36]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

The fact is we shouldn't even care about OVR ratings... we should only care about positional skill ratings.

I agree with everything you said, although I think the above can be dicey.

I've heard several people suggest that overall doesn't matter at all. I don't know if I buy that.

Sure, it's not the end-all. But some Madden fans have worked at great lengths to see how OVR is calculated for each position and it is position specific to a large extent.

I think that overall gives you an inexact snapshot on how good the player is. He may not excel at exactly what you need him for, but he's good enough at something.

If there's an 80 OVR CB sitting in FA in my franchise, chances are he's got solid coverage ratings. Now you'll have to dig deeper to see if he's solid at man, zone, or both -- but his overall does suggest to you that he's a quality player.

On the other hand, you can surf through FA and find a CB rated a 68. While he may be lacking some physical skills, he may be a solid zone CB.

That's why I say it's dicey. OVR is not the end-all, but it's not completely useless either although I'm not suggesting that's what you implied .

[Big FN Deal]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

I agree with Rgiles and that's why I keep saying it is not a value rating when it's the same for every team. It's a universal numeric assessment of each players overall Madden performance potential, based on certain ratings in relation to position. (ie QB, RB, DT, etc). Not their team specific worth or importance.

Considering that, giving a rookie in Madden 80+ OVR, is predetermining their performance potential in Madden, before they have demonstrated it in the real life NFL. This is evidenced by the fact that however rookies do eventually preform in the real NFL, adjustments are then made to their Madden ratings and OVR.

So, I think it's pretty clear OVR is currently premature for rookies and unrealistic in general and it should be replaced with an actual individual team/system/coach/roster based Value rating. However, then all other ratings need to be data based, not directly subjective and there needs to be some system, like in HC09, that allows each team's variables, like system/coach/rosters/etc, to actually affect player performance and progression in Madden.

[DCEBB2001]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

So, this was how you had them rated before a single down was played, or after a full season? Starting with his first game in the NFL, Willis was a beast. He had 174 tackles, 4 sacks , 2 forced fumbles, 5 pass deflections, was voted in as a starter to the Pro Bowl and was Defensive rookie of the year, NFL Linebacker of the year. He was a beast... so 71 OVR? He was one of the NFLs best linebackers as a rookie and only got better... and you have him as the 9th best rookie of 2007? You have him lower than Brady Quinn and on par with J. Russ? That's why it's really hard to take your ratings any more serious than EA's.

The fact is we shouldn't even care about OVR ratings... we should only care about positional skill ratings.

The ratings I posted were from BEFORE THE DRAFT for each of those seasons. Players do not get ratings boosts every week or so like they do with EA. They get adjusted as evidence is provided that an adjustment is worthy. This includes mini-camps, training camps, preseason games, regular season games, playoffs, etc. Willis was in excess of an 85 after his rookie season. That is a HUGE jump, even for FBGratings, which undoubtedly recognized his dominate rookie season. Other guys on that list, did not advance as high or as fast as a guy like Willis from that draft.

So please, keep that in mind before bashing an entire ratings system. I think it would be more civil to provide evidence for why you dislike them instead of firing an ill-advised, presumptuous response as you did above.

[Big FN Deal]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

@DCEBB while I respect and prefer your data driven approach to player ratings, I don't think there is anything you can do about progression and the lack of team specific variable impacts. I was really hoping that EA brought you "into the fold" for M13 so a data driven process would be fundamentally coded in the game.

I don't understand why things seemingly have to be done a certain way simply because they have been for so long that people expect it. I have to wonder if the authenticity espoused about Madden going forward applies to ratings.

Anyway, let me ask everybody something. Can Madden just not have OVR for rookies in the game, period? I mean, nobody knows how productive they will be at a NFL level, so they should at least omit the OVR and have a "?" for every Madden players entire first year in the NFL. Show all their other ratings, just no OVR.

[moneal2001]

Re: Good Article on Overrating Rookies

get rid of OVR completely and replace it with a production rating so each team can use that to evaluate them for free agency. also add a value rating for trades like nba2k does.

ovr in 2k does not always equal value. a low rated but young 1st rounder can have a greater value than an older decent rated roster filler.