FBGRatings Seeks to Recalibrate Madden Ratings, Change Game

[Gritblitzer]

What would possess someone to have Hakeem Nicks of the New York Giants sitting at an 81 overall? No offense but that's outrageous to me. Because he's injured a lot? That's all well and fine but that should bump his injury down, not his stats. When he's healthy he is clearly one of the better receivers in the league. His stats aren't quite what they should be with Victor Cruz sitting in the slot every week. However, I would take Nicks over Cruz every single time I had to chose one if I knew they would both be 100% healthy. He's got great hands, he can run any type of route, and he's fast. This is a guy who once made a catch between his legs one handed when he was in college. And a guy who has made numerous catches that most guys would never make. Yet because he is injured more often than most, he is down rated?

This of course is no smashing of you or your ratings, I love a lot of them and think a lot are right (Although I do also agree on the Gronkwoski rating being way too low - the guy is easily the best blocking and receiving tight end in the league.

You guys are doing a great job, keep up the good work. The service you guys do for madden gamers of all sorts is great. Don't let any one question or complaint knock you folks down from doing this stuff! I am interested however in knowing what types of statistics and such you use to get these ratings.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by seels

Those ratings leave a lot to be desired. I don't know how it's possible to have any of the following: Gronk at 93, when hes playing at probably the highest level a TE has EVER played at Sanchez at 80 - one of the worst QBs in the league Peterson at 93 -- Seriously? Steven Jackson at 91 Marshawn Lynch at 84 Percy Harvin at 85 Griffin at 82, Cam at 88 I could go on and on, but these ratings seem stuck in 2010. You say you have direct feedback from scouts in creating these, well I gaurantee no scout on the planet would evaluate Steven Jackson and say he is better than Marshawn Lynch and close to Peterson. No scout would say Percy is not a top 20 receiver, especially below mediocrities like Pierre Garcon.

First of all the ratings were last updated on a large scale back in mid October. Second, injuries always affect the OVR rating. Check the injury report before looking at a player's rating. It will be in the newswire on the bottom of the player's page. Third, the ratings are based on CONSISTENT effort at the rating level. Fourth, they are derived from scouting data, not production. High production does not lead to high attributes that calculate the sum of a player's skills. The reverse of that also does not follow. A RB, according to the Madden formula for calculating the OVR rating, is also evaluated on pass blocking and run blocking skills. In Peterson's case, he is not a strong blocker in any form. He doesn't even play on 3rd downs. That will undoubtedly bring down his OVR. Fifth, a rating of a 90 is considered to be elite. A 99 is nearly unheard of (think Rodgers in 2011, LT in 2006, etc..).

When looking at these ratings, look at the PARTS, not the sum, as they are far more important in evaluating talent...especially in an NFL that is becoming more and more specialized. Also, consider that 70 is average for all the physical attributes, and the entire ratings scale is used. I haven't updated the entire site in a while because we are experimenting with a few changes, but most of the ratings you see above have changed.

Here is how they are rated in the offline database as of 11/16/12, as well as my rebuttle to your assessment. I don't usually offer explanations for players in particular since everyone has an opinion, but I will do it to provide a brief sample of what I would say:

Gronk: 92 (evaluated before injury). I would argue that Gronk is playing very well...but with possibly the best QB/coach combination in NFL history. Would he be as great if he played for the Browns? Guys rated 95+ would be great on any team in any era. Obviously, the scouts don't think he is quite at this level. He is not quite there yet, but is getting close with that current rating.

Sanchez: 80. He is not a great QB. Nowhere near elite. As it stands, however, he isn't rated as such. He is tied for the 25th best in the league. As you can see, this matches your assessment as one of the worst QBs in the league, as a starter, however.

Peterson: 93. AD is still getting stronger coming off of a serious injury that he miraculously rushed back from. Once he is back to form and 100%, I'm sure he will be pushing 95+. However, like I mentioned above, his blocking skills do calculate to his OVR rating, and those most certainly do not help him, overall.

Jackson: 91. He is a consistent player who does everything well. He grades out highly as a ball carrier, receiver, and blocker. The other fact is that he does it consistently for the Rams, and has been for a while. What he lacks in elusiveness or open field moves he makes up for in other more technical areas. He may not be as explosive as a guy like Peterson with the ball in his hands, but he may be considered a more complete back.

Lynch: 84. One-trick pony here. Not a willing blocker...and not great at it when he does. Good at moving the pile though and cranking out yards after contact. Average receiver at best out of the backfield. Look at the parts...not their sum.

Harvin: 89. Made a big jump this year. He is explosive and has average hands. Not going to wow you with a great sideline grab or catch in the trash, but is great in space. Only going to get better.

RGIII: 82. Plays in a scripted offense, but has elite downfield accuracy as we have seen in recent weeks. His mid ball is questionable at best on 15 yard digs and out routes. Great on the run and elusive as hell. Only going to get better. Will be pushing 90 by the end of the season. Once we get more data and a larger body of work his rating will go up. Remember...we only rate guys on consistent effort illustrated over longer periods of time.

Newton: 88. He has all the physical ability as he showed last year. He is RGIII but bigger, less athletic, more arm strength, and less downfield accuracy. No doubt his down year will affect his OVR eventually, but are all of the ills of this season his fault? That line looks pretty darn shaky.

If you have ESPN insider, you know that Scouts, Inc offers some insights into evaluating players. They don't give the formula for how they do so, but every scouting agency rates players based on the attributes and weights they see fit. This is the take on ratings based off of my insiders and their information. Scouts are never in full agreement, but I tried to focus more on the parts than the sum because Madden forces us into this "OVR Box" that really doesn't matter in-game. I would encourage you to use the ratings in a couple play-now games and write up a report on what you find vs. how EA rates players. Maybe you like it, maybe you won't. It's cool either way. What I do know, however, is that this system relies on stuff that EA doesn't incorporate fully, if at all. Some people like this system, so this is for them. I don't aim to please everyone, but I do appreciate your opinion in this matter.

Cheers!

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by Liqui15

What would possess someone to have Hakeem Nicks of the New York Giants sitting at an 81 overall? No offense but that's outrageous to me. Because he's injured a lot? That's all well and fine but that should bump his injury down, not his stats. When he's healthy he is clearly one of the better receivers in the league. His stats aren't quite what they should be with Victor Cruz sitting in the slot every week. However, I would take Nicks over Cruz every single time I had to chose one if I knew they would both be 100% healthy. He's got great hands, he can run any type of route, and he's fast. This is a guy who once made a catch between his legs one handed when he was in college. And a guy who has made numerous catches that most guys would never make. Yet because he is injured more often than most, he is down rated? This of course is no smashing of you or your ratings, I love a lot of them and think a lot are right (Although I do also agree on the Gronkwoski rating being way too low - the guy is easily the best blocking and receiving tight end in the league. You guys are doing a great job, keep up the good work. The service you guys do for madden gamers of all sorts is great. Don't let any one question or complaint knock you folks down from doing this stuff! I am interested however in knowing what types of statistics and such you use to get these ratings.

The injury debate is always on-going. The reason we make injuries affect the OVR and other attributes is because injuries do affect in-game performance. If I play Nicks with all his ratings at 100% of his ability but with his INJ rating of say 50, he will still play at 100% in game, but will just have a higher likelihood of getting hurt. Now, I don't know if you watched NFL Network's NFC Playbook this week, but Sterling Sharpe and Donovan McNabb pointed out that Nicks is not getting his usual separation in pass routes BECAUSE OF HIS INJURY. That means that the injury IS affecting the other ratings. Think about that. If I get a high ankle sprain, thus lowering my evaluation of injury proneness, does that mean I will still be expected to cut while running routes at full speed? Of course not! My coaches would sit me out because I would not be able to physically function at a level high enough to run a crisp, fast, route. They would shut me down. I appreciate Nicks' toughness for sticking it out while injured, but even the analysts can break down how his injuries are physically affecting him.

The other side of this is that once Nicks is recovered from this injury, his ratings will go back up. I update them every single Thursday. They are very dynamic and change often based on the most recent data. That is why I always disclaimer anyone who views the site to first check the injury report. Otherwise having Ray Lewis rated a 40 would appear insane.


EDIT:
I want to add that Nicks was rated a 90 before the injury...definitely elite at full strength.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

The injury debate is always on-going. The reason we make injuries affect the OVR and other attributes is because injuries do affect in-game performance. If I play Nicks with all his ratings at 100% of his ability but with his INJ rating of say 50, he will still play at 100% in game, but will just have a higher likelihood of getting hurt. Now, I don't know if you watched NFL Network's NFC Playbook this week, but Sterling Sharpe and Donovan McNabb pointed out that Nicks is not getting his usual separation in pass routes BECAUSE OF HIS INJURY. That means that the injury IS affecting the other ratings. Think about that. If I get a high ankle sprain, thus lowering my evaluation of injury proneness, does that mean I will still be expected to cut while running routes at full speed? Of course not! My coaches would sit me out because I would not be able to physically function at a level high enough to run a crisp, fast, route. They would shut me down. I appreciate Nicks' toughness for sticking it out while injured, but even the analysts can break down how his injuries are physically affecting him. The other side of this is that once Nicks is recovered from this injury, his ratings will go back up. I update them every single Thursday. They are very dynamic and change often based on the most recent data. That is why I always disclaimer anyone who views the site to first check the injury report. Otherwise having Ray Lewis rated a 40 would appear insane. EDIT: I want to add that Nicks was rated a 90 before the injury...definitely elite at full strength.

Good points DCEBB, which leads to another question. Wouldn't it be great if Madden had lingering multiple injuries that players could play through and allowed Users to edit injuries? It would not only allow roster creators like yourself to be even more accurate to real life but EA Tiburon's own weekly updates.

Maybe we will see things like this after 2014.

[DCEBB2001]

Good question BIG. The great thing about the scouting info is I have a record of every single injury suffered by every player during their career, and it's severity. We keep very close tabs on injuries with FBG. If it was on an injury report, we have a record of it. That includes going back to high school for most players.

[Big FN Deal]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Good question BIG. The great thing about the scouting info is I have a record of every single injury suffered by every player during their career, and it's severity. We keep very close tabs on injuries with FBG. If it was on an injury report, we have a record of it. That includes going back to high school for most players.

I am very impressed that you actually account for injuries in your ratings and it just makes the fact that EA Tiburon doesn't all the more disappointing. I read people stating that devs read these threads but how is it they allegedly see things posted like this and yet Madden still is what it is. SMH

I guess someone decided that a more realistic representation of injuries is not "fun".

[EAGLESFAN10]

If I remember correctly you know someone who works close with madden and was wondering if you ever threw ideas to him/her to tell the devs ????

[DCEBB2001]

I'll explain my link to Madden:

FBG Ratings is powered by The SportsXChange (TSX as we call it). TSX also powers NFLDraftScout.com, which supplies scouting info to all 32 teams, CBS Sports, and a bunch of other clients. Now the owner of TSX is a guy by the name of Frank Cooney. Frank is very good friends with John Madden himself, and has been a guest of Mr. Madden's personally on his tour bus during the NFL season. Now many of you may or may not know that it is John Madden's DAUGHTER who sees over the Madden NFL video game series, not John himself. Basically, John delegated to his daughter to handle the licensing of his name and likeness and does not manage it himself.

So my link to EA is that my webspace is owned by a guy who is very close friends with John Madden, which is the entire reason the site is in existence in the first place. Other than that the only link I have to EA was via my interview for a position with them last year when the exodus at Madden happened (willingly or not) and they were looking to promote guys like Donny Moore to higher positions at Tiburon-Orlando.