Jump to content
buffalo_tox

How to Update 2017-2018 rosters

Recommended Posts

Hi everyone,

 

I plan to attempt to update 2017-2018 rosters.

I'll have no problem going through all of the screens one by one in the TSB Manager to update all the depth charts (but let me know if there is an easier way).

 

However, I struggle with assigning the ratings to the players that
A. Make sense with giving the best players their due

B. Doesn't mess with game balance.

 

How do other folks handle this?

If anyone has any good ideas (or has already done the analysis and can flat out post some good player stats), I can do the leg work and actually use TSB Tool to set those player stats, and then copy+paste into this thread when I'm done.

Edited by buffalo_tox

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are some articles scattered around the site for determining player ratings. If you can't find them, or are still stuck maybe come up with some more specific questions or what specifically you are having trouble with rating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best idea that I have is to find a position ranking somewhere of best to worst players, and just use the original tecmobowl counterparts to apply the rankings to.

Since there are more teams now, I'd "duplicate" the most average players at each positon to make up the difference.

I think this method would work unless anyone else wanted to share what strategies they employed when they created their ROMs.

Really, I'm trying to find a systematic way to do things so bias (or decision making) doesn't enter the equation.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One person converts madden ratings to tecmo ratings via an excel spreadsheet. You probably still have some bias with the madden raters but that's the nature of rating players in a game like football that can't be broken down as easily as baseball because of all the interacting players and schemes. One other issue is that madden doesn't scale linearly really due to the nature of the engine so the formulas

need to be pretty complex to be good.  

 

 

 

 

Many people have used various formulas using nfl statistics as a basis for their ratings. This makes it somewhat objective. Then they may apply subjective tweaks based on their knowledge of the teams

players. There are a few websites that attempt to quantify the value of a player or rate them in various aspects. But in general scouting/rating data is hard to find. Defenders can be the hardest to rate since sometimes good defenders don't always generate a ton of stats that are recorded (tackles/sacks/ints) 

 

 

SOME RATING TOPIC THREADS

 

Everyone here goes about making their rom slightly differently. There isn't really a wrong or right way as long as you like the final results. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

for "balance" - something I do is break down the number of a certain type of player on the 1991 TSB and then correlate it to the 32 team rom.  

 

for example, on the 1991 TSB, see the following regarding QB1 Pass Control attribute, the 1st column is PC value, the 2nd column is the number of QBs with that value, the 3rd column is simply (2nd column)*32/28, which would give the relative number of players on a 32 team rom that would be similar on the 1991 28 team rom.

 

qb1 PC 32 team
81 2 2.3
75 2 2.3
69 3 3.4
63 3 3.4
56 2 2.3
50 2 2.3
44 6 6.9
38 1 1.1
31 4 4.6
25 3 3.4

 

as you can see, there were 6x QBs with 44 PC, this means that on my 32 team rom there will be 7 QBs with 44 PC.  same thing with WR REC, MS, RB MS, etc.

 

I think that this sort of birds eye view is good for balance of rom.  

 

another thing I have been thinking about is actually breaking down percentages of teams with certain players....for example, what percentage of teams have at least one RB with 50 MS or more...and so forth.  and then applying these percentages to frame team ratings for a modern 32 team rom.

 

 

 

Edited by buck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, buffalo_tox said:

I'll have no problem going through all of the screens one by one in the TSB Manager to update all the depth charts (but let me know if there is an easier way).

 

This may save you some time.  Once you enter all the players, ratings, etc - just paste into TSBTool Supreme.  Instead of going one by one...

TSBTool Import Spreadsheet.xlsx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This article might be helpful in ranking players:

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2685170-nfl1000-final-regular-season-breakdown-of-the-leagues-top-players

 

I like how they give grades to different attributes as well, makes it easier to tailor your rankings to each individual player's strengths and weaknesses. And it's free, not like Pro Football Focus.

Edited by SBlueman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've attached a open office spreadsheet with the player ratings from the NFL1000 rankings frim Bleacher Report to this post for anyone who might find it useful in editing player rankings. Visit the link to the article for more info.

 

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2685170-nfl1000-final-regular-season-breakdown-of-the-leagues-top-players

 

Its a good read and also does a nice recap at the best in each position at different aspects.

 

NFL1000 Player Rankings By Position.ods

 

Edited by SBlueman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@buck

 

Yes and no. As you know AV = approximate value that's a heavy emphasis on approximate value. The system was somewhat gamed until it produced results that passed the eye/sniff test if you read the methodolgy behind it. It definitely doesn't hurt as a rough starting point but its using somewhat  limited information to form its rating. 

 

Defensive positions and offensive lineman suffer massively if you don't make the pro-bowl or all-pro. Offensive lineman basically have no other stats than starts and awards. Then they split all of the offensive pie evenly even if you have 3 good but not all pro OL and 2 awful ones. 

 

Also I've notices that certain positions AV has suffered due to more data being tracked and thus more of the wealth being spread around. DB's in particular have seen their AV drop both relatively from the 90's to now and also because more DB's are seeing the field so its splitting more of the defensive pie amongst more players. 

 

It works better but still not great as a career measure vs a yearly measure. The guy who came up with it basically qualifies as it like this

 

"If one player is 16 and on player is 14 we can't be very confident that the 16 AV player had a better season than the 14 AV player. But i am pretty confident that the collection

of ALL players with 16AV played better than the collection of ALL players with 14AV "

 

The top 1000 article is like 6 guys watching a shit ton of film on all the guys they review.

 

"Each player was scouted by a team of experienced evaluators (Dan Bazal, Cian Fahey, Duke Manyweather, Marshal Miller, Luke Easterling and Matt Miller) with these key criteria in mind. The following grades are the result of months of film study from our team.

 

Is 6 guys reveiwing film the end all be all...nope. But its probably just as useful as AV or can help fill in more subtle things that AV misses.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×