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

League Forums

Main - Beta Chat

Re: Volatility exposure

By jdavidbakr - Site Admin
7/08/2016 8:34 am
CCSAHARA wrote:
I like the idea of volatility but it looks like it is just making the draft a total **** shoot. If I draft a top tier player and he has say a 90 on volatile and then busts big time. A scouting department would have minimized the chance of that happening. [ yes, I know it happens in the NFL Johnny Football, Ryan Leif] but also remember that top teams with top scouting departments don’t make those mistakes often. Would it be possible to have a scout that would effect that like we have coaches?


In real life though you have players that look great but there is a significant question about whether they will make it as a pro athlete. So you might have a Tim Tebow who looks like he could be a great player, but his volatility is really high ... either he's going to be really good, or it's not going to work. On the other hand, you have Andrew Lucks who it's very clear that they will be a good NFL QB, so he'll be more likely to get chosen early.

To me, hiding the volatility as it was previously makes the draft a **** shoot, because you don't know the likelihood of whether he will boom or bust or just stay the way he is. Showing the volatility will cause you to really consider whether to take that player with a 90 volatility early in the draft, causing his draft stock to sink a little more than it would otherwise, so you have a little bit more of an educated guess about the player.

Re: Volatility exposure

By CCSAHARA
7/08/2016 9:06 am
Ok, that makes sense. What I noticed in this draft [and I may be wrong] but the volatility ratings seem to be very high. 80 plus in the top players. Didn't have much time as usual to study this draft.

Re: Volatility exposure

By lellow2011
7/08/2016 9:21 am
CCSAHARA wrote:
I like the idea of volatility but it looks like it is just making the draft a total **** shoot. If I draft a top tier player and he has say a 90 on volatile and then busts big time. A scouting department would have minimized the chance of that happening. [ yes, I know it happens in the NFL Johnny Football, Ryan Leif] but also remember that top teams with top scouting departments don’t make those mistakes often. Would it be possible to have a scout that would effect that like we have coaches?


Even the best teams when it comes to drafting would be estatic to hit on 40-50% of their picks.

Re: Volatility exposure

By ibblacklavender02
7/08/2016 9:22 am
CCSAHARA wrote:
Ok, that makes sense. What I noticed in this draft [and I may be wrong] but the volatility ratings seem to be very high. 80 plus in the top players. Didn't have much time as usual to study this draft.
I drafted a player 3rd pick 32 with a 98 volatility rating

Re: Volatility exposure

By CCSAHARA
7/08/2016 10:07 am
Being a Bears fan I would be ecstatic for 20% !

Re: Volatility exposure

By raymattison21
7/12/2016 4:57 pm
jdavidbakr wrote:
I am toying around with the idea of making volatility move during a oalyer's career, that would be a future update.

The csv will include the volatility if we decide to keep it, which I think we will. I like what it's done in the draft so far.


I see a player will have to be real lucky to gain say 30 points like some rare gems with 100 volatility do now. Having it change each season would in theory level the talent. As the chances would be even greater to have 100 volatility each season of development. That is if I am understanding it correctly.

Still I really like the idea of it changing. IRL the best of the best do it every season. Despite the odds. Perhaps the level at what gains can be achieved each time is expanded to compensate for the lack of chance to hit 100 every season. The idea could be tied in to late career boomers.

Guys getting 6,7,8 points of gains a season later in their careers. After getting low volatility scores early in their careers with let's say slight gains the player received higher volatility scores for season 5 to 7 he gains 18-21 points in that span.

I like the current system so changing it is not a necessity. On the other hand I feel veteran gamers have clear advantage in knowing the current system. Trading older players for high draft picks would be a more difficult. That is probably the best benefit that would not just be my opinion of it emulating real life. Like Elway being so much better late in his career. I even see super gems evolving from this, but they would be as rare as Brady.

Re: Volatility exposure

By WarEagle
7/13/2016 7:58 am
lellow2011 wrote:


Even the best teams when it comes to drafting would be estatic to hit on 40-50% of their picks.


That seems very low to me. I think the best teams would be very disappointed to only hit on 40-50% of their picks.

What do you mean by "hit"?

I know it probably varies by round, but in general I would hope a round 1-3 pick would become starter quality, and 4-7 would make the team. I know 5-7 round picks rarely make the team in MFN, but I am referring to the NFL here.

Does your comment mean that you think more than 50% of NFL rosters are made up of undrafted players? Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean.

Re: Volatility exposure

By ibblacklavender02
7/13/2016 8:02 am
i wish there was a way to tie it into stats ex. reaching certain amount of yards, tackles, sacks, tds......not to just piggy back off a thread but the same with contract demands
Last edited at 7/13/2016 8:06 am

Re: Volatility exposure

By lellow2011
7/13/2016 8:40 am
WarEagle wrote:
lellow2011 wrote:


Even the best teams when it comes to drafting would be estatic to hit on 40-50% of their picks.


That seems very low to me. I think the best teams would be very disappointed to only hit on 40-50% of their picks.

What do you mean by "hit"?

I know it probably varies by round, but in general I would hope a round 1-3 pick would become starter quality, and 4-7 would make the team. I know 5-7 round picks rarely make the team in MFN, but I am referring to the NFL here.

Does your comment mean that you think more than 50% of NFL rosters are made up of undrafted players? Maybe I'm misunderstanding what you mean.


A good read if you think 50% is low http://datascopeanalytics.com/blog/the-chance-of-a-bust-in-the-nfl-draft/

Re: Volatility exposure

By WarEagle
7/13/2016 4:52 pm
lellow2011 wrote:


An interesting read indeed.

I don't suppose you've seen this type of data on a team by team basis? Surely the Cleveland Browns and Oakland Raiders are bringing these numbers down for everyone!

Also, there are never any "ready to start" players in the MFN drafts. Heck, in the MFN universe, RBs must fumble every 5th carry in college. WRs are dropping passes left and right, etc.