New Sticky Note

NOTICE: This league is using the BLEEDING EDGE game engine. For more information, click here.

The new user interface is in preview!

Want to check it out? Click here! (If you don't like it, you can still switch back)

League Forums

Main - Community Help Forum

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By setherick
7/20/2016 6:25 pm
dei1c3 wrote:
lellow2011 wrote:
WarEagle wrote:
jdavidbakr wrote:
For #2 and #3 the primary driver is player intelligence.


Even for highly intelligent players it takes way too long for them to learn a play.

Really, how many weeks do you think an NFL team spends practicing the same play before their smartest players "get it"?

My guess would be one or less.



In fact a new game plan each week may have several hundred plays that the player is expected to learn and run that week.

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/11/17/nfl-carson-palmer-arizona-cardinals-inside-game-plan

My only counter argument to that is it's not "knows vs. doesn't know", it's the degree to which the player knows the play. And in fact, it's doubtful that any of the plays in a given week are being introduced for the first time. All that groundwork is laid during training camp and then built on for a given week's game plan refreshing what was learned earlier for that week's game. Just like in MFN, where the player learns some in TC, in preseason, and in any game where a given play is called. It's a progression.

I'm not saying familiarity isn't slow, but you guys are comparing apples and oranges with this "players learn a play in 1 week" thing.


When play knowledge (play you are running and playing against) accounts for 30% -- let that sink in for a second, 30% -- of a player's effectiveness, we're not comparing apples and oranges.

How many times did you see Peyton Manning fooled by a defense? Or see Ray Lewis fooled by an offensive play?

Did those things happen? Sure. Did they happen every single week, no way. Right now, if you have a team that has almost full play knowledge in the plays they are running, they have a 15% advantage over the defense that will not have played against those plays.

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By dei1c3
7/20/2016 7:43 pm
Horrible examples. You're talking about Hall of Famers who played 18 and 17 years, respectively. Sure they weren't fooled in their prime but early on? I don't remember Ray's early career that well, but...

How many times did you see Peyton Manning fooled by a defense?

As a Pats fan, I saw him fooled for, oh, about the first 4 or 5 years of his career. ****, in the 2003-04 championship game (end of his 6th season) the Pats had him completely confused and picked him off 4 times. Guy had no idea what was going on then.

Look, I understand the frustration but the truth, as usual, is somewhere in the middle between the current rate of improvement and "one game".

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
7/21/2016 8:59 am
setherick wrote:
When play knowledge (play you are running and playing against) accounts for 30% -- let that sink in for a second, 30% -- of a player's effectiveness, we're not comparing apples and oranges.


You're overstating this a bit - I probably didn't explain that breakdown well enough.

Here's what's happening: there is a standard calculation that is used throughout the engine to give players a boost/penalty based on the factors listed. When this calculation is used, that is the breakdown of what pieces influence it and to what degree. Sometimes this calculation influences a very small amount of the logic - 10% perhaps - while attributes, weight, etc. usually influence most of the logic. There are only a few decisions that this calculation has a significant impact (usually around reaction time).

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By setherick
7/21/2016 4:55 pm
jdavidbakr wrote:
setherick wrote:
When play knowledge (play you are running and playing against) accounts for 30% -- let that sink in for a second, 30% -- of a player's effectiveness, we're not comparing apples and oranges.


There are only a few decisions that this calculation has a significant impact (usually around reaction time).


Otherwise known as the reason why the OL is getting destroyed by fast DEs?

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By MC_Hammer
7/21/2016 5:50 pm
setherick wrote:
jdavidbakr wrote:
setherick wrote:
When play knowledge (play you are running and playing against) accounts for 30% -- let that sink in for a second, 30% -- of a player's effectiveness, we're not comparing apples and oranges.


There are only a few decisions that this calculation has a significant impact (usually around reaction time).


Otherwise known as the reason why the OL is getting destroyed by fast DEs?


But certainly not the only reason.
How many coaches do you know that value speed/acceleration for their OTs? Then when teams DO utilize more athletic OTs, a defense can put their pass rushing DTs higher in the depth chart.
Constant game of cat & mouse the way I see it... and I love it!

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By setherick
7/21/2016 6:02 pm
MC_Hammer wrote:
setherick wrote:
jdavidbakr wrote:
setherick wrote:
When play knowledge (play you are running and playing against) accounts for 30% -- let that sink in for a second, 30% -- of a player's effectiveness, we're not comparing apples and oranges.


There are only a few decisions that this calculation has a significant impact (usually around reaction time).


Otherwise known as the reason why the OL is getting destroyed by fast DEs?


But certainly not the only reason.
How many coaches do you know that value speed/acceleration for their OTs? Then when teams DO utilize more athletic OTs, a defense can put their pass rushing DTs higher in the depth chart.
Constant game of cat & mouse the way I see it... and I love it!


I absolutely value AC, ST and Pass Blocking, and I still see a major difference between teams that know the plays and teams that don't. But I agree, not enough players value AC on OL.

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By MC_Hammer
7/21/2016 6:44 pm
both speed and acceleration, not just acceleration... gotta keep up with those speed rush DEs.
Of course strength and blocking skills are important, that is a given.

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
7/21/2016 7:21 pm
This has had an overhaul in the upcoming version. The DL is too overpowered in the pass rush right now. MFN-1 is currently testing and I like what I'm seeing there so far.
Last edited at 7/21/2016 7:21 pm

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By MC_Hammer
7/22/2016 3:39 pm
jdavidbakr wrote:
This has had an overhaul in the upcoming version. The DL is too overpowered in the pass rush right now. MFN-1 is currently testing and I like what I'm seeing there so far.


It is, but not to the extent that some claim it is IMO.

Re: Position Experiance and Blocking

By jgcruz
7/23/2016 1:42 am
dei1c3 wrote:
lellow2011 wrote:
WarEagle wrote:
jdavidbakr wrote:
For #2 and #3 the primary driver is player intelligence.


Even for highly intelligent players it takes way too long for them to learn a play.

Really, how many weeks do you think an NFL team spends practicing the same play before their smartest players "get it"?

My guess would be one or less.



In fact a new game plan each week may have several hundred plays that the player is expected to learn and run that week.

http://mmqb.si.com/mmqb/2015/11/17/nfl-carson-palmer-arizona-cardinals-inside-game-plan

My only counter argument to that is it's not "knows vs. doesn't know", it's the degree to which the player knows the play. And in fact, it's doubtful that any of the plays in a given week are being introduced for the first time. All that groundwork is laid during training camp and then built on for a given week's game plan refreshing what was learned earlier for that week's game. Just like in MFN, where the player learns some in TC, in preseason, and in any game where a given play is called. It's a progression.

I'm not saying familiarity isn't slow, but you guys are comparing apples and oranges with this "players learn a play in 1 week" thing.


It's possible that some GMs are assuming that a "0" in terms of a player's knowledge about a play means he knows nothing about it. Remember, a "0" in speed doesn't mean that a player can't move. Nor does a "0" in any attribute mean that a player completely lacks that attribute. Just that relatively speaking, he possesses less of that attribute than most other players. Therefore, a "0" in knowledge just means that a player knows less about a play than someone rated higher than "0". Moreover, in terms of successfully running a play, whatever degree of knowledge a player has or lacks with respect to that play are complimented or lessened by a host of factors, including your opponent's degree of knowledge, the entire sum of which means success or failure when running that play.
Last edited at 7/23/2016 1:43 am