FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game

[da professor]

Quote: Originally Posted by charter04

Lol. "Combine is also different than with pads...it is essentially useless" NFL coaches, GM's, and teams sure waist a lot of valuable time on something that is useless. Obviously film study plays a big part too but, useless? Scouting data and film study are a part of these too. If you want ratings based solely on film and opinion then the Madden ones should be great. 1. The way these are done aren't changing no matter how much you don't like it. 2. Some of us love the way these rosters play on the field. Who cares about the overalls. As long as they play as they should. 3. Obviously you don't like them so why are you spending so much time arguing in this thread when point 1 and 2 aren't changing?

Scouting and film of a player is probably 80-90% of a teams data for drafting...and the remaining 10 or so % is combine measurables. By FBGP ratings, everything is based on the past if I understand the explanation...which is a terrible representation of the current player. Lesean McCoy was a highlight reel almost every game. His cut backs/vision while the play was broken was remarkable, but Ray Rice is more agile/faster/quicker...but he couldn't get out of his own way last year.

1. I doubt they will change, especially since I'm the only one that thinks they are broken. It's obvious they are broken

2. How can the players play as they should when they are over or under rated? I've given multiple examples and nobody can give a good explanation.

3. Because the ratings are so incredible wrong that it bothers me that nobody has issue...

[charter04]

Quote: Originally Posted by da professor

Scouting and film of a player is probably 80-90% of a teams data for drafting...and the remaining 10 or so % is combine measurables. By FBGP ratings, everything is based on the past if I understand the explanation...which is a terrible representation of the current player. Lesean McCoy was a highlight reel almost every game. His cut backs/vision while the play was broken was remarkable, but Ray Rice is more agile/faster/quicker...but he couldn't get out of his own way last year. 1. I doubt they will change, especially since I'm the only one that thinks they are broken. It's obvious they are broken 2. How can the players play as they should when they are over or under rated? I've given multiple examples and nobody can give a good explanation. 3. Because the ratings are so incredible wrong that it bothers me that nobody has issue...

I'm not sure why you think everything is based on the past. The only thing used like that is combine or pro day numbers but, those aren't permanent. They change ratings based on age and injury as well. Everything is real time as far as changes. It's funny that you throw out %'s and numbers as fact. Like you have some inside tract on what NFL teams do. Lol

Also I still can't quit understand why you seem to care so much. No money is being made. It's just for fun. Who cares if someone does something that you don't like or agree with. SMH

1. That's you opinion. That's the funny things about opinions.

2. Have you played a game with them? I have. I love how they play v Madden ratings. So your assumption is based on an uneducated opinion.

3. Your not the only one to come in and do what your doing. Many others complian.

[da professor]

Quote: Originally Posted by charter04

I'm not sure why you think everything is based on the past. The only thing used like that is combine or pro day numbers but, those aren't permanent. They change ratings based on age and injury as well. Everything is real time as far as changes. It's funny that you throw out %'s and numbers as fact. Like you have some inside tract on what NFL teams do. Lol Also I still can't quit understand why you seem to care so much. No money is being made. It's just for fun. Who cares if someone does something that you don't like or agree with. SMH 1. That's you opinion. That's the funny things about opinions. 2. Have you played a game with them? I have. I love how they play v Madden ratings. So your assumption is based on an uneducated opinion. 3. Your not the only one to come in and do what your doing. Many others complian.

I said, probably 80-90%. How is that fact? That means I'm unsure, but based on what I have heard from basically every analyst. I said everything is based on the past because some of the explanations of where the ratings come from on previous posts are from their combine data. Which is an inaccurate representation of the current player, correct? If everything is real time, why is McCoy/Rice broken? If it truly "real time", then Ray Rice would have diminished attributes.
WHY CAN'T ANYONE EXPLAIN ANYTHING?

[DCEBB2001]

Thank you CM Hope and charter04. I deal with people like this all of the time. I will try my best to "explain anything" to him.


I really couldn't have said what CM Hope and charter04 have said better myself. I do believe that "da professor" is missing the point a bit. Everything at FBG Ratings is based on empirical, measurable, data. The scouting data fills in the void for rating the technical skills because scouts attempt to convert qualitative data into quantitative data quite frequently. What FBG Ratings does, is use that already converted data to convert it once more into Madden's ratings system, which utilizes a 0-99 point scale. The scouting data, meanwhile, uses a 0.00-5.00 grading scale with 0.01 incriments. Regardless, the data is in the same numeric format, albeit adjusted to what Madden's ratings system requires.

Perhaps you need to ask yourself this question when evaluating players: What data am I utilizing to make my assumptions? Youtube videos? Casual watching of the game on TV? Game film? The reason this is so important is because the frame of reference, ie: primary source material, will frame your results. I could have chosen to use PFF when rating players a long time ago, but PFF didn't provide to me all of the necessary data needed to rate players in Madden. As I pointed out earlier, PFF doesn't tell me anything about how far a QB can throw, how fast a RB can run, or how tough a DT is. PFF is great for other things, like noticing tendencies, but falls short when providing data for specific traits. Where in the report from Frederick's rookie season does it tell you how strong he is? Where does it tell you how good his footwork is in passing situations? Where does it tell you how tough he is or how aware he is?

The point is that the real NFL scouting data that I am privy to provides not only MORE data for all kinds of players, those in the NFL and otherwise, but also provides data that better corresponds to what we need to rate players in Madden. When you say that "Tyron Smith isn't a 76" and "Doug Free isn't a (sp?) 86", I beg to ask, what makes you say so? Do you have data that argues otherwise within the framework of Madden? Is that data more or less valid than the data that you are comparing it to (my data)? Are you just using someone else's opinion to back up your claim, or did you do the work yourself? If you are using PFF to simply make that call, then I am sorry, but I must protest. PFF doesn't grade players the same way that a scout would grade players. Furthermore, scouts grade players more like how Madden rates them, then how PFF rates them.

The data itself is all current. I get a huge batch of some 70,000 players every May/June and then get weekly updates for those on NFL rosters each week thereafter. So, I am not using "old data" aside from the combine data. Curiously enough, if you do your research you will find that the average NFL player only loses about .01 on a 40 time per NFL season accrued. That means that a player who ran a 4.40 his rookie year will only drop to a 4.50 after only ten years in the league, not accounting for injury. This is a pretty negligible difference, but it is accounted for. Even if Rice and McCoy both lost .01 seconds on a 40 time over the course of their careers, Rice would still be faster because McCoy only would make up for 1 season's worth of a difference (because he came into the league only one year later in 2009). This, however, does not apply to all players. Some players lose more, some players actually gain, depending on what the data says for that given player.


On to your examples:

If Tyron Smith was "leaps and bounds better than Free", then I would think that my data would reflect that, given what I know about the data source and its validity. If the data wasn't valid, then why the heck did I have to sign several NDA's just to be able to obtain it, at the cost of being sued into the stone age if I violate them? Did your source material require such veracity? Why would I waste my time? I make NO MONEY on the website. It doesn't make sense to rate over 26,000 players without pay and do a crappy job.

Let's consider Smith and Free and look to see how I have them rated, to see if it is so unreasonable. Smith is a better athlete. He had a higher maximum velocity during his best 40 yard dash run (the SPD rating in Madden) and had a better initial velocity (the ACC rating in Madden). His combination of 1-Rep Max in the Bench Press, Squat, and Power Clean was also higher than that of Free, giving him a higher STR rating. Free, however, tested better in both the lateral agility and rotational agility tests (the 20 yard shuttle and 3 cone drill) meaning that he has a higher raw AGI rating in Madden. His vertical and broad jump scores were also higher, giving him better vertical and lateral leaping abilities, and thus, a higher JMP rating in Madden. Those scores are what they are, as they come from the combine/pro day results, events in which prospects spend tens of thousands of dollas to train for and for which 30 of the 32 teams spend $80,000 a pop to get the official results for. Wanna know a secret? The data that NFL Network and NFL.com posts is bogus. BLESTO and Pro Scouting doesn't even release the official data until a week after the combine is over, so you cannot trust what NFL Network publishes. They literally (and I have seen him with my own two eyes in person) have a guy for the NFLN who HAND TIMES the times in real time, records them, and gets them to a production manager to publish "real time". It is complete crap, but because you don't get to see it (because I doubt you have ever gotten the credentials to actually attend the event like yours truely), you probably don't even know any better. Regardless, if you have the official data, it is pretty hard to argue such data.

Let's get to the technical skills, provided by the scouting data. Free tested higher in the scouting category of "Field Awareness" with a raw score of 4.3/5.0. Smith had a score of 3.85 in the same category. Is that hard to believe? One player is a 7 year veteran with 71 career starts and the other is a 3 year veteran with 47 career starts. I would think, and hope, that a player with more experience WOULD be more aware.

When it comes to blocking, don't look at the aggregate scores of PBK and RBK. These are "overall" scores that serve only as metrics for simulation purposes in Madden. What matters most are the 5 game-play blocking attributes (IBL, RBS, RBF, PBS, PBF).

Smith is undoubtedly better at performing impact blocks, as indicated by the "Pancaking/Finishing" category in the scouting data. He scored a 4.05/5.00 while Free scored only a 3.35 in the same category. For the "Run Blocking Point of Attach Strength/Leverage" category, Smith had a 3.45 compared to Free's 4.35, almost a full point difference between the two blockers. The "Running/pulling/trapping Footwork" (RBF) category gave the slight edge to Smith with a 4.20 compared to Free's 4.00. The "Pass Blocking Point of Attach Strength/Leverage" (PBS) was nearly a push with Smith at 4.35 and Free at 4.40. For "Pass Block Kick-Slide/Sidestep Footwork" (PBF), Smith had a 4.25 compared to Free's 4.00.

From this we can make a few assumptions:

1. Smith has better feet than Free and is a better overall athlete being quicker, stronger, and faster. All of which is likely why he was placed at LT instead of RT, considering you want your maulers on the right and blind-side pass blockers on the left. Most teams run more to the right and have right handed QBs. Makes sense right?

2. Smith is stronger than Free, but doesn't carry it over to being a mauler in the run game, evidenced by his weaker RBS and PBS scores. Once again, this is probably why he is best at LT.

3. Smith's physical advantages will allow him to grow into a better player, in time, once he refines some of the technical skills he is lacking in comparison to Free (RBS, PBS). This is called "having a higher ceiling", because the physical advantage allows a player to "grow" into his position, develop his technical skills, and thus be a better football player than someone of lesser physical talent.

4. Free makes up a lot of ground in the OVR rating by having more experience on the field (AWR) and being able to use his strength to a higher potential in the blocking game (RBS, PBS), albeit, Smith's ceiling is higher due to him being a better overall athlete (aside from the AGI and JMP advantages that Free has).


So, even though all you see is 86 to 76, what the difference really comes down to is the fact that Madden gives more credit to AWR, RBS, and PBS than it does to IBL, RBF, and PBF for OTs. In addition, Madden also has different OVR formula calculations for LTs and RTs. A RT is easier to be rated higher with the same attributes. If you slide Free with his ratings over to LT, his OVR drops. If you slide Smith over to RT with his same attributes, his rating increases. Why? Because LT is the hardest spot to play at on the OL and it takes more talent to be an equally good LT compared to any other position on the OL.

On to Frederick, a beloved Former Badger:

In the same tests as Smith and Free, Frederick scored amazingly in STR, mostly due to his 760lb squat. However, he is slower, less explosive, and less agile than his OT counterparts. However, Frederick scored a 3.80 in AWR, 4.20 in IBL, 3.70 in RBS, 3.65 in RBF, 3.85 in PBS, and 3.50 in PBF. If you average the PBK-related and RBK-related skills, they both come out to be the same grade of 3.675. Therefore, the scouts feel that his overall RBK and PBK scores are about the same, even though they are weighted differently for his position (RBK skills are more important for the C position).


Given all of this information, the final step is to compare these players to other players on the website. Otherwise, you have no frame of reference. A player can be rated a 70, but what if 70 is the highest grade, then, he is the best right? Well, FBG ratings utilizes the full 99-1 scale for attributes. Any grade over 90 is considered elite. It would be like having a grade of 99 in EA's current system given how easily EA gives out 90+ in attribute ratings. What FBG Ratings does instead, is use the entire scale, pair it up with the scouting data, and give you a TRUE view of how players are REALLY rated in real life (via the scouting data). Then, those scores are converted into Madden data (Madden attributes).

Since you seem so focused on Tyron Smith and how good he is (or isn't) let's compare him to the best OT on FBG Ratings: Joe Thomas. Here is how Thomas scored according to the scouting data:

AWR: 4.45
IBL: 4.40
RBS: 4.90
RBF: 4.15
PBS: 4.90
PBF: 4.10
STR: 88
AGI: 47
SPD: 69
ACC: 61
JMP: 70

Let's see Smith's:
AWR: 3.85
IBL: 4.05
RBS: 3.45
RBF: 4.20
PBS: 4.35
PBF: 4.25
STR: 90
AGI: 62
SPD: 64
ACC: 68
JMP: 69

When you look at this, Smith actually graded HIGHER than the best OT in the game in several categories like RBF, PBF, STR, AGI, and ACC. However, Thomas was able to overcome these shortcomings (with small margins except for the difference in AGI) with vastly superior AWR, RBS, and PBS. Now consider that Madden's OVR formula weighs these attributes higher and PRESTO!, Thomas is rated almost 20 OVR points higher. However, given this data, you can see where Smith could catch him, given he is a better overall athlete so long as he enhances his technical skills.



As for Rice and McCoy, Rice had higher 1-rep-max totals in the three key strength-indicating lifts, he ran better in the agility drills, had a higher maximum velocity and initial velocity, and was more explosive while jumping vertically and laterally. Those numbers you cannot argue.

Rice:
STR: 85
AGI: 88
SPD: 83
ACC: 92
JMP: 87

McCoy:
STR: 78 (-7)
AGI: 84 (-4)
SPD: 81 (-2)
ACC: 87 (-5)
JMP: 61 (-26)


Now, let's go to the technical skills:

Rice:
AWR: 98
CTH: 93
CAR: 80
TRK: 75
ELU: 98
BCV: 98
SFA: 75
SPM: 98
JKM: 98
IBL: 41
RBS: 39
RBF: 39
PBS: 77
PBF: 74
SPC: 85
CIT: 84
RTE: 90
REL: 90


McCoy:
AWR: 92 (-6)
CTH: 90 (-3)
CAR: 80
TRK: 85 (+10)
ELU: 95 (-3)
BCV: 96 (-2)
SFA: 85 (+10)
SPM: 98
JKM: 98
IBL: 17 (-24)
RBS: 18 (-21)
RBF: 16 (-23)
PBS: 49 (-28)
PBF: 47 (-27)
SPC: 78 (-7)
CIT: 80 (-4)
RTE: 84 (-6)
REL: 86 (-4)


From this, you can see that Rice is not only a better athlete in every raw, physical category, but his blocking ability makes him a better player. Despite the huge differences in blocking, and smaller advantages in other categories (aside from TRK and SFA where McCoy has a large advantage), Rice is only a 93 OVR compared to a 90 OVR. This is once again because Madden weighs these traits lower than other traits for RBs. The difference in OVR would be even wider if both players were moved to the FB position, where blocking skills are even more important. If you negate the blocking skills, both players are actually pretty equal, which further reflects how close they are both rated in OVR values (93 to 90).


For the TE examples you provided, especially regarding their SPD ratings, you must think of the SPD and ACC ratings as being symbiotic. Why? Because Madden defines SPD and ACC as two different measures when you break down the player movement by counting the frames and distances in which they run.

The SPD rating is based on the highest, maximum velocity attained when a player is running. All players in Madden, when all of their STA attributes are equal, will accelerate up to, but no further than, the 40 yard mark in a run. From 40 yards onward, the players will maintain the velocity reached at 40 yards.

The ACC rating is based on the player's initial burst, or, initial velocity. That is the value at which the player starts moving at during a run. This takes place in the instance he goes from 0 to the rate designated by the ACC rating. This moment is instantaneous.

You can graph out each player's run by taking their split times in their best 40 yard dash attempt. For the players you provided, they are as follows:

Gronk:
0 yds: 0 sec
10 yds: 1.58 sec
20 yds: 2.68 sec
40 yds: 4.68 sec

Witten:
0 yds: 0 sec
10 yds: 1.62 sec
20 yds: 2.68 sec
40 yds: 4.65 sec

Graham:
0 yds: 0 sec
10 yds: 1.53 sec
20 yds: 2.61 sec
40 yds: 4.53 sec

When you graph these times and distances and then differentiate (do a little calculus), you can determine the maximum speed and initial velocities for each player. Then, because position has no bearing on velocity, you can determine how fast and quick each player is compared to the entire population of football players. These are the results.

Gronk:
SPD: 73
ACC: 80

Witten:
SPD: 78
ACC: 76

Graham:
SPD: 80
ACC: 86


As you can see, Graham is by far the fastest and quickest of the group. Witten and Gronk, meanwhile, are very comparable in that Gronk is initially quicker, but Witten catches up and passes him later in the run. The 40 times simply verify this. What really disturbs me about your thinking is that you think that a TE playing a WR in some offensive sets means that he MUST be faster. That thinking is logically backward. It is because a TE is a bit FASTER that ALLOWS him to move to WR in some offensive sets, along with some other traits that make him a formidable target (size, strength, length, catching ability, route running, release, etc).


From this very lengthy post, you can be rest assured that no stone was left unturned when formulating these ratings. And, IMO, I believe that they are a more accurate representation of what we see on Sundays vs. what EA puts out via "youtube scouting". That is not for me to decide, however. That is up to the community to decide. Given the amount of interest in the site per the number of emails and phone calls I receive daily regarding its contents, I think that many people out there agree with what we are doing.

That being said, I don't really care if you buy into it or not. Maybe you should accept my challenge of creating your own website with your own ratings if you do not like mine, or just use the ones spoon-fed to you by EA. After all, EA LOVES using faulty logic and over-inflation to rate players. Perhaps you would feel more at home with them. Nobody is making you use FBG Ratings, so why are you bothering with so many posts that border condescension? If I am wasting my time, aren't you wasting yours arguing with me?

charter04 is right - nothing is going to change what I am doing unless you bring something constructive to my attention, as members here have before. But up until now, I do not see anything aside from borderline attempts at flaming and some questionable logic backed by nothing more than opinion. You believe that the Rice/McCOy comparison is broken. Show me how. Back it up with some data instead of spouting off your opinion please, because until you do so, nobody will take you seriously.

[Big FN Deal]

I don't post about your ratings much anymore because it just frustrates me that Tiburon doesn't do something similar but as usual great discussion Dan. I can't believe how adamant that poster was about your ratings being wrong and them seeming like they think you owe them an explanation, lol. Maybe they misunderstood the thread title and somehow thought your ratings are being used in Madden by Tiburon, if I could only be so lucky.

Anyway man, just happened to stumble in here and read the last few pages, good job keeping it classy Dan, keep up the good work.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by Big FN Deal

I don't post about your ratings much anymore because it just frustrates me that Tiburon doesn't do something similar but as usual great discussion Dan. I can't believe how adamant that poster was about your ratings being wrong and them seeming like they think you owe them an explanation, lol. Maybe they misunderstood the thread title and somehow thought your ratings are being used in Madden by Tiburon, if I could only be so lucky. Anyway man, just happened to stumble in here and read the last few pages, good job keeping it classy Dan, keep up the good work.

Thank you, Sir! I will continue to do my best.

[Yubbed]

I don't care about the overall ratings if they play like they should then I'm happy. Unfortunately I have to do all the roster manually no internet sucks haha. I do play with the teams I have done so far on play now have to say I'm pleased!! Very well done job!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by Yubbed

I don't care about the overall ratings if they play like they should then I'm happy. Unfortunately I have to do all the roster manually no internet sucks haha. I do play with the teams I have done so far on play now have to say I'm pleased!! Very well done job! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you. Should have another update done within the next week with updated player movement, ratings, etc.