Madden NFL 16 Player Ratings - Top 5 Tight Ends

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by jshake8

If you're going to have anything to do with this video game in the future, I sincerely hope you don't believe this. Do you really not see the flaw in "making everything data driven"? We're talking about the sport with the most moving parts and variables in the world. Each player is impacted by the other 21 players on the field. The ultimate test is the eyeball, and any scout would tell you that. So if you can't even explain your ratings with anything more than data, they shouldn't be taken seriously. Well, you're clearly just ignoring me now. I tried to understand your system at first so that I could support it, and now I'm trying to offer some constructive criticism and you're just being short and rude. I love your ideas about how to separate the weak, from the average, from the great, but you're actual ratings simply don't match what happens on the field. If you want to take your ideas to the next level, and have them used by "professionals" you should be able to stand by them and explain them without getting defensive.

I'm not getting defensive about anything. You clearly are not listening. The scouts make the grades. They make the data. If they say that on the overall scale Gronk < Marshall (by a fraction of the scale...I mean, we are talking about one point here), then I have to abide by it. I am not using simple stats or PFF or anything like that. I am using REAL DATA that is used by a REAL NFL FRONT OFFICE.

How on earth can I question that?

At this point, it is what it is, and if you don't like it, don't use them.

[VdaStampede]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

Based on the data, I am sitting here and saying that today, Brandon Marshall is a better overall player. Until the data says otherwise, I will stand by it.

Which is absurd to anyone who watches football. The problem is football is not baseball the entire sport can't be summed up by stats and metrics.

Scouts have great info to share no doubt, but they don't determine who plays or sits or who makes the team and who doesn't.

[jblanch32]

I mean, Gronk had a better season than Marshall in almost every category.. (Including per game statistics)

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by jblanch32

I mean, Gronk had a better season than Marshall in almost every category.. (Including per game statistics)

Statistics alone, a player, does not make.

[DCEBB2001]

Quote: Originally Posted by VdaStampede

Which is absurd to anyone who watches football. The problem is football is not baseball the entire sport can't be summed up by stats and metrics. Scouts have great info to share no doubt, but they don't determine who plays or sits or who makes the team and who doesn't.

Nor do they tell GMs who to draft.

Like in 2007 when the scouts that provide the data to my site had JaMarcus Russell rated a 4.98 the day before the draft. That's barely a 4th round grade.

Don't blame the scouts for GM/owner miscues. It is rare the scouts ever get to pull the trigger. All they do is observe and report.

Don't kill the messengers.

[BreakingBad2013]

Quote: Originally Posted by Wildcats302

And this is why going simply off data is 100% the wrong way to do it. You have to factor in the obvious common sense at times, and the eye test. Honestly your ratings are much more realistic, and a better way of doing it than Madden, but clearly its not close to being perfect either.

Well, Gronk plays with one of the best passers in the world, he uses his size mostly, over actual technique and skill. He is a obe dimensional route runner, and he had a season where in 6 games he had less than 50 yards.

Brandon Marshall is a much better technical pass catcher thsn Gronk, and unfortunately battled a ton of injuries lsst year, which I feel should lower his ratings.

We're on this Gronk kick like he's a God. The kid is a like foot taller than some DBs, and has a ridiculous size advantage. You'll see more like him soon enough. He's not perfect though, and if he were placed on the Jets, we wouldn't be talking about him.

[sir psycho]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

I trust the scouts' eyes more than my own.

That pretty much sums up my feelings on this whole subject. If you asked me, who I think is a better player between Gronk and Marshall...for sure I would say Gronkowski. But, the fact is these ratings are coming from real scouts. I trust that they know more about evaluating players than I do. Are they perfect? No...but I'd rather have ratings determined by these scouts than by guys like me just watching football and saying, "Yep, Gronkowski's better...let's make sure he has a higher rating." That last scenario is where we've been for a while with Madden and it doesn't work.

[jshake8]

Quote: Originally Posted by DCEBB2001

I'm not getting defensive about anything. You clearly are not listening. The scouts make the grades. They make the data. If they say that on the overall scale Gronk < Marshall (by a fraction of the scale...I mean, we are talking about one point here), then I have to abide by it. I am not using simple stats or PFF or anything like that. I am using REAL DATA that is used by a REAL NFL FRONT OFFICE. How on earth can I question that? At this point, it is what it is, and if you don't like it, don't use them.

I'm not listening? I've asked you a mostly questions and you've ignored most of them. You're clearly getting defensive man. I understand they make the data. It should absolutely be used, and heavily, but not solely relied upon. You don't HAVE to abide by the data. Actually, doing so is your main flaw. If you watched either player last year, it would be quite obvious as to why Gronk is a much better player. Data can be very, very wrong, and you seem unwilling to account for this. If you want to use the "Real NFL front office" argument here, why not use this information the same way they do? That's the problem. What NFL front offices use as a tool to guide them in evaluation, you're using like scouting bible.

I hope EA understands this, because you don't seem to. You're system could be outstanding if you did more "scouting" of your own to account for the inaccuracies that occur with data.