QuikSand
09-21-2008, 03:08 PM
I'm just getting started with the game but have an observation that might be connected to a number of things I'm seeing.
In looking at my top RB on my team, here are his numeric skills:
Overall: 75
Peak: 75
Rushing: 85
Receiving: 81
Durability: 85
Blocking: 76
Hands: 95
Ordinarily, I would expect that the composite rating for a player would be some sort of weighted average of his component ratings -- but here, that's clearly not the case. The 75 overall is actually lower than *any* of his component ratings.
So, either there is some strange scaling at work, or more likely, a bug in the creation of the composite ratings for (some?) running backs. I have not done the work to see how widespread this problem might be, but it's perfectly clear in this case, and seems to be the case for every RB on my roster.
I have also noticed there being very very few highly-rated RB near the top of the draft in any year (I have only run through 8 drafts, but have yet to even be tempted by a RB in an early round in even one of them, regardless of need). Perhaps the quality guys (like the guy above) are being hidden by an improperly depressed overall rating? A 70/70 RB doesn't look great next to, say, a 75/85 WR... but if he's hiding lots of 85+ individual ratings, maybe I'm missing out on a lot of talent there after all. (I am routinely seeing great-rated FB in every draft, and hardly any RB who seem to be worth much at all)
Anyhow... I think it's a bug, and it might reach beyond the RB position, but it might have pretty far-reaching consequences.
In looking at my top RB on my team, here are his numeric skills:
Overall: 75
Peak: 75
Rushing: 85
Receiving: 81
Durability: 85
Blocking: 76
Hands: 95
Ordinarily, I would expect that the composite rating for a player would be some sort of weighted average of his component ratings -- but here, that's clearly not the case. The 75 overall is actually lower than *any* of his component ratings.
So, either there is some strange scaling at work, or more likely, a bug in the creation of the composite ratings for (some?) running backs. I have not done the work to see how widespread this problem might be, but it's perfectly clear in this case, and seems to be the case for every RB on my roster.
I have also noticed there being very very few highly-rated RB near the top of the draft in any year (I have only run through 8 drafts, but have yet to even be tempted by a RB in an early round in even one of them, regardless of need). Perhaps the quality guys (like the guy above) are being hidden by an improperly depressed overall rating? A 70/70 RB doesn't look great next to, say, a 75/85 WR... but if he's hiding lots of 85+ individual ratings, maybe I'm missing out on a lot of talent there after all. (I am routinely seeing great-rated FB in every draft, and hardly any RB who seem to be worth much at all)
Anyhow... I think it's a bug, and it might reach beyond the RB position, but it might have pretty far-reaching consequences.