|
Post by manwithnoname on Oct 8, 2018 12:55:43 GMT -5
I think elusiveness has become a lot more effective in FOF8 than it may have been in FOF7. Hole Rec is still king but I've had a bunch of guys with Elusiveness being their only high bar and they would constantly average between 4-6 YPC. To be fair though most of them were backups or "change of pace backs". I still have a hard time really trusting it.
|
|
|
Post by nick on Oct 8, 2018 13:08:21 GMT -5
I have no problem with having 0 ELU. I really want a North-South runner. Lost yardage is just so disruptive.
|
|
ezlee2
Junior Member
Posts: 79
|
Post by ezlee2 on Oct 9, 2018 22:44:07 GMT -5
HR and END are the only bars I care about for RBs
|
|
|
Post by bdubbs on Oct 11, 2018 21:05:32 GMT -5
I think it also depends on what you consider an important bar. What are the potential 0 bars that would worry you that other bars are gonna drop?
|
|
|
Post by garion333 on Oct 12, 2018 8:11:32 GMT -5
0 bars on statics is a strong sign of a faker, especially if that position only has one static bar (ie. WRs).
With D players who have PRS and PH you can sometimes rationalize a 0 bar in one of them as the Bench going fully into the other. For instance, 100 PRS and 0 PH would require me to take a second look and not immediately dismiss the guy.
You can still take players with 0 bars, but each 0 increases the chance he's gonna die. After 2k7 and FOF7 Jim removed thresholds on bars, or, at least, gave those thresholds some more wiggle room. A bench below 10 for a QB no longer meant they're going to end up junk, you can still draft QBs with 8 or 9. In doing so, he created counter examples to things people learned from drafting in prior versions. So, there's more wiggle room now with everything, however a 0 bar is still something best to be avoided if you want to draft players who will grow. Just like it's still good to draft guys who have high or max statics. It's no longer a sure sign they'll pop, but it's still a better sign than if they had a 0 there.
|
|
|
Post by bdubbs on Oct 17, 2018 2:03:01 GMT -5
Well maybe it will hurt me in the long run but personally I just have a hard time putting much faith in the predictive value of the static bars. The exceptions are WRs/Te's, RBs, and QB to a lesser extent. Aside from being static BPR is just an important bar for a pass catcher period. If a guy shows high enough RR I'll still take a flier on him depending on the round, but yeah BPR is very important. Same with sense rush, it may not be super predictive and a big SR doesn't mean a QB can overcome trash bars elsewhere, but I'd prefer my starting QB to have decent SR because odds are you don't always have some kind of godly OL to keep him safe, and a low enough SR can hold a QB back even if he's got talent. Hole rec might be king, but personally I like to see good static bars on RB's because they have some value by themselves when it comes to a guy's potential to rip off big gains or get you that 1 yard you really need.
Blocking strength, PH, and PRS just aren't that big of a deal to me. If an OL has good strength sure I'll take it as a bonus, but idc if its low or 0 if his other blocking bars are good, and I see enough guys with good RBK and PBK with low strength not to be afraid of that bar. As far as I'm concerned outside of our perception of predictive value PH is a meaningless bar. PRS is a good bonus to have on a guy, but PRT is again the more important bar by far when it comes to generating pressure and sacks. Depending on how good a class you're looking at usually by the back end of the second round most players are going to have something going on with them that gives you pause and makes you question whether or not he will be any good. I'll always see the statics as something to consider, I just don't think it's quite a big a deal as we as players tend to make of it when we talk about drafting specifically when it comes to these defensive players
|
|