The Draft Has Begun - Official Draft Discussion Thread

[Guest]

Yeah, I just read that. Interesting stuff. No long passing bar, though, which threw me. Also, I always have trouble evaluating no combine guys. Is there a guideline to doing it? Is it just based on bars?

Bars, interview, adjusted rating, and whatever combine score might be showing (SOL and POS, if applicable). But really, the best way is knowing how the patterns in the bars work, and that only comes from playing FOF a lot.

[Guest]

I'll believe it when I see it.

*shurg*

Sure, there's the tiny chance that he'll take a volatility hit and will never be unmasked, but I'd strongly suggest checking out the threads at FOFC on masking, combines, etc. It's the key to identifying good/great players in this computer game.

[Clay]

Shit.... something went wrong... I got picked for and it wasn't a guy on my list. Last thing I need is a RB.

If anyone likes Johnnie Tillitski he's on the block.

[aholbert]

Shit.... something went wrong... I got picked for and it wasn't a guy on my list. Last thing I need is a RB.

If anyone likes Johnnie Tillitski he's on the block.

Clay,

You didnt have a list. The time limit ran out on you and the utility picked the highest ranked player.

[Clay]

I had a list. I still have 3 guys on it in fact.

[nflchampion]

You probably didn't have it turned on.

[aholbert]

I had a list. I still have 3 guys on it in fact.

Strange. It wasnt showing when you were on the clock. I even said to myself that it was strange that you were away so long and didnt make a list.

[Clay]

Strange. It wasnt showing when you were on the clock. I even said to myself that it was strange that you were away so long and didnt make a list.

It is what it is.

I'll either trade the guy or turn him into a FB. Not impressed with this draft class after the first 20-25 anyway.

[Aston]

sorry for missing my pick. I wasn't around for a while as I said and missed all my interviews.

Is anyone up for another 3rd-round-pick? At this point I'm looking for future picks.

[aholbert]

Beginning of the third???

If I could have figured out a way to trade up to 1.2 as well as 1.1, I would have taken him there. I didn't have time to check in most of this weekend, or I would have traded up once I saw he fell out of the top 10.

LOL. Cmon Ben. 1.2? The guy is the 102 ranked player in the draft and you would take him #2? Based on a theory that Tubbs doesnt even completely meet? Especially when your team has needs at CB, S, LB and T. He has a high sense of rush but his long passing is average. He does meet the one exception w/ a high 3rd/two minutes but this is far from a guarantee.

Based on the theory and his bar there is a decent chance he is going to be good but saying he should have gone #2 is either a hugh stretch or total BS.

[aholbert]

Another thing about all the theories. We are now 8 seasons into this league and i've heard a few of them. Things like the most important thing to focus on is the combine scores and not the bars, that QB's are the most important position etc. Some of them have turned out to be true and some havent. To be honest, I think its more a crap shoot than anything.

Put of the 16 teams that have made it to a Stevens Cup only 2 are people I would consider to be regular FOF Central readers. You have guys like me and MattG who rarely/never read the theories and have won championships. Guys like Sully who made it to 2 SCs and he isnt one of those guys either.

From personal experience, the only reason I know any of these theories is that guys will post them here from time to time. I remember hearing the combine numbers theory in year 2 and everybody started drafting based on combine numbers and ignored the bars. Now i've had 5 first round picks in 7 yrs, the four I picked by analyzing the bars, combine, the interview and the score equally have ranged from all pros to solid starters (Strickland, Eicholz, Feigenbaum and Oliver). The one I picked based on combine numbers (Brennan) was a flat bust. Its just a small sample but I guess I'm not the type to just believe every theory.

[Clay]

I don't really know any of the theories except the Popularity = Better Rookies thing, but I can't even figure out how to look at those numbers.

But... don't use me as a judge... because I haven't won crap.

[Guest]

LOL. Cmon Ben. 1.2? The guy is the 102 ranked player in the draft and you would take him #2? Based on a theory that Tubbs doesnt even completely meet? Especially when your team has needs at CB, S, LB and T. He has a high sense of rush but his long passing is average. He does meet the one exception w/ a high 3rd/two minutes but this is far from a guarantee.

Based on the theory and his bar there is a decent chance he is going to be good but saying he should have gone #2 is either a hugh stretch or total BS.

First off, there are a small handful of people who qualify it when they're posting unproven/untested theories, but when they post facts, they identify them as such. MalcPow is one of them. I know what he did to draw these conclusions. That thread isn't theory; it's fact. Further, from playing SP, I had identified some of masked pairs myself without the controlled testing that MalcPow did, and this guy absolutely fits the profile of a hugely masked QB. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that I don't think I've ever seen a QB with his bar signature that isn't hugely masked.

Second, the situation is that *any* of the combinations of masked pairs is the tell, not all of them. Let's look at the key section again:

Masked QBs, especially quality guys, will almost always have high sense rush coupled with a high long passing bar or a pair of high bars in the following combinations: med/timing, short/acc, 3rd/two min, and deep/read. No combine guys are more likely to be masked in this way.

Not allpairs. A pair. Any one of the those pairs is a tell. If he had all of them high, then he wouldn't be masked; he'd have a bunch of high bars. ;) My Scout is VG at young talent and VG at QBs, which means the interview result shows better where the masked bars are. And sure enough, after interviewing, this guy's 3rd/2-min bars are identical, and his Sense Rush is likely in the 80-90 range.

Third, Jim appears to have left some clues around to identify good players (whether intentionally or unintentionally, I don't know). (NOTE: the rest of this paragraph is theory, but very, very strongly supported by hundreds of seasons of gameplay.) I'm of the belief that some positions have bars that can *never* get above around 80 unless the player is exceptional. I am about 95% convinced that Sense Rush for QBs is one of those. Pay very close attention to that bar.

Finally, sure my team has needs at other positions, but in this computer game, QB/WR/WR is by far the most important setup you can have. It trumps everything. Because of the fictional start, it takes a few years for league-wide offensive cohesion to rise enough for offense to completely overpower everything, but this league is pretty close to being there now, and it definitely will be there once my new QB is fully developed. The other strategies have worked up to now, but unfortunately, unless there's a new version, QB/WR/WR will dwarf everything pretty much henceforth.

[Guest]

Another thing about all the theories. We are now 8 seasons into this league and i've heard a few of them. Things like the most important thing to focus on is the combine scores and not the bars, that QB's are the most important position etc. Some of them have turned out to be true and some havent. To be honest, I think its more a crap shoot than anything.

Put of the 16 teams that have made it to a Stevens Cup only 2 are people I would consider to be regular FOF Central readers. You have guys like me and MattG who rarely/never read the theories and have won championships. Guys like Sully who made it to 2 SCs and he isnt one of those guys either.

From personal experience, the only reason I know any of these theories is that guys will post them here from time to time. I remember hearing the combine numbers theory in year 2 and everybody started drafting based on combine numbers and ignored the bars. Now i've had 5 first round picks in 7 yrs, the four I picked by analyzing the bars, combine, the interview and the score equally have ranged from all pros to solid starters (Strickland, Eicholz, Feigenbaum and Oliver). The one I picked based on combine numbers (Brennan) was a flat bust. Its just a small sample but I guess I'm not the type to just believe every theory.

We're talking statistics and probability here, not the results of a very small number of trials (8 bowl games). Jim himself has stated categorically that combines are by far the most important thign to look at. I wish FOF didn't work like it did, but it is what it is: a computer game with lots of little puzzles that Jim (evidently) put in to be solved. Solving the puzzles = better success. Of course, with all of the dice rolls, there's no such thing as a *guarantee* of winning, but understanding how the game works and using that knowledge is, unfortunately, the #1 key to long-term FOF success.

[Andrew]

Maybe it's just me but I wish this stuff was never posted here. I would get way more enjoyment out of this league/game if it was more about building a real football team rather than trying to figure out patterns to game the game.