[caballero]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Here are the averages for RBK for these positions: HB: 28 40 FB: 56 68 TE: 58 60.6 WR: 30 40 OT: 81 82 OG: 81 82 C: 77 80.5

EA's in Red (from default roster)

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Welker would fit the role of TE pretty well given his ratings. Here are his ratings compared to that of the average for a TE (). STR 56 (71) 55 (71) AGI 76 (71)97 (75) SPD 77 (70) 86 (75.5) ACC 87 (71) 98 (79) CTH 88 (64) 98 (73) CAR 79 (57) 75 (68) PBK 53 (57) x (55) RBK 67 (58) x (61) JMP 65 (67) 74 (76) TRK 69 (63) 67 (62) ELU 76 (36) 95 (46) BCV 78 (52) 94 (60) SFA 75 (63) 65 (60) SPM 81 (51) 92 (58) JKM 84 (55) 90 (62) IBL 74 (65) 35 ! (63) RBS 75 (63) 35 ! (x) RBF 73 (64) 35 (x) PBS 57 (57) 17 ! (x) PBF 58 (62) 17 (x) SPC 89 (60) 88 (67.5) CIT 89 (63) 99 (72) RTE 99 (59) 97 (61.5) REL 99 (64) 69 ! (65.5)

EA's Welker and Average TE in Blue.

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Perhaps I did not make this clear, although I thought I did. ALL OFFENSIVE PLAYERS ASIDE FROM QBs ARE RATED ON THE SAME BLOCKING SCALE FROM 0.0-5.0. That means that no matter what position you play be it RB/FB or WR/TE or OT/OG/C you are graded on the same scale. Now, in the case of Welker, he graded out around 2.0 for RBK on that scale. Gronk only graded out at 1.8 on that scale. The best OL currently on the list is only at 3.8. The average of all WRs for example was 1.0. No matter how you slice it, the scouts deemed: Best OL > Welker > Gronk > Average WR

Yelling won't make it true... Gronk & Welker don't block the same type of players, and this scale is 95% contextual.
It would be VERY efficient when comparing players of the same position! but you said the ratings were universal, no?

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

There are numerous instances where WRs are asked to block/chip DEs and LBs, especially when they are in the slot or in motion across the formation. TEs also need to be capable to block CBs and Ss on outside stalk/crack blocks such as on WR screen passes. The scouting grades base their grades ONLY if everything is equal and they take the scheme/opportunity to block particular players into account.

I'll repeat myself cos this was overlooked: WW plays in the slot in 3 receiver sets, which the Pats use less and less, he's therefore mostly blocking CB's.

When he's sent in motion, it's not to chip block, and we both know this.

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Look at the STR ratings for Gronk and Welker. Welker may have better "technique" but clearly lacks the STR to sustain a block at the point of attack. Remember, in FBG ratings, they all work together, ESPECIALLY the raw attributes with dynamic attributes.

so why does Welker has a higher Run Blocking STRENGTH than Gronk?
Maybe I'm not the one "clearly failing".

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

You clearly fail to realize the context of the scouting data and this ratings system. The data takes everything into account, normalizes it, and outputs a grade. This system utilizes UNIVERSAL data that is the result of the normalization of several CONTEXTS.

It's OK being wrong Dan, we're all humans.
Welker is graded (in your system/scouting data) as a better blocker than Gronk because they don't block the same guys.
Gronk would MAUL the guys Welker is asked to block, being, well... he's 80lb heavier and 9 inches taller!

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

As a TE, Welker grades out as a 101 because the attributes that he is lowest in (STR, JMP, PBS, and PBF) are only weighted at .14, .06, .06, and .06 of the overall calculation. Gronk, however, as a WR is only rated an 87. This is primarily due to some of his better attributes (TRK, ELU, SFA, SPC, and CIT) are only weighted at .04, .08, .03, .08 and .14. These attributes are among carrying the least amount of weight for a WR.

where did you get these?

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

In fact, the OPPOSITE of your assumption that "Gronkowski is a better WR than Welker would be a TE" is true.

I meant in real life, hence the (Welker) "would".

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

your assumption that "WW drops to an 80 OVR as TE" is also untrue. Welker as a WR is 90. Welker as a TE is a 101. Gronk as a WR is only an 87. Gronk actually DROPS from a 93 to an 87 by moving out to WR whereas Welker actualy INCREASES from a 90 as a WR to 101 as a TE. See #5 for some possible reasons why.

Not an assumption, it's what I get in M13 depth chart when subbing WW...