Custom Play Policy Discussion

[James-Eagles]

James, you are going to have to make a more convincing argument about hiding rookie pots
The idea that everyone (NFL) know the players potential is silly and inaccurate.
The NFL draft is one of the most inexact sciences in sports.
There are 10-20 undrafted players per team on NFL rosters today.
The PNFL has (if I counted correctly) 49 total players, all of whom are filler.
And, btw, 15 of those are your team alone.
So, 17 teams have 34 or 2 per team.
Why?
Because we know every players potential and nobody makes mistakes.

If you hate the idea because you don't want to be wrong, admit it.
If you get the #1 pick in the draft and there are 2 WRs sitting there and they look similar in actuals but both their pots say this:
A-A-A-B-A-A-A-A
you are afraid that one player might be :
83-85-90-63-95-95-95
the other could be:
84-86-91-64-96-96-96
And if you pick the wrong one, it would sting
As a coach I might not love this either but its reality of the NFL draft.
How does Trevor Lawrence look today?
We were all told he was a can't miss generational talent....hmmm, not so much yet.

At least admit you hate it for selfish reasons

I think it's a gimmick the flaws in a real NFL are known are a calculated choice. You know up and down side and you playing the odds. Is Lawrence a Lawrence issue or coaching and supporting player issue? People forget there were concerns about how little he player among other things.
If you really think NFL scouts don't know the in and out of these players you are mistaken. The draft isn't a crap shoot. It is a risk reward thing. You don't think Niner's coaching staff want Mac Jones over Trey Lance. Could you imagine how good Mac Jones would be as a Niner?

It isn't afraid of it. It's a stupid gimmick. We don't have issues because there isn't person issue, coaching issues etc. I even suggested something that would be an informed boost or drop tied to a player which would be harsher than this. It isn't me who is afraid of randomness. It is hiding informtation that would be known.

[James-Eagles]

Most of my plays are NOT designed to play a particular opposing team but to be part of an effective game plan to be useful against many opposing teams. The best new plays are those kinds of plays, which is why longer exclusive usage is a real incentive for good play design.

Yes and in realism you get to use that play 1 or 2 times before the team has it figured out during the game. You get a whole game to abuse it.

[Donovon-Steelers]

James, you are going to have to make a more convincing argument about hiding rookie pots
The idea that everyone (NFL) know the players potential is silly and inaccurate.
The NFL draft is one of the most inexact sciences in sports.
There are 10-20 undrafted players per team on NFL rosters today.
The PNFL has (if I counted correctly) 49 total players, all of whom are filler.
And, btw, 15 of those are your team alone.
So, 17 teams have 34 or 2 per team.
Why?
Because we know every players potential and nobody makes mistakes.

If you hate the idea because you don't want to be wrong, admit it.
If you get the #1 pick in the draft and there are 2 WRs sitting there and they look similar in actuals but both their pots say this:
A-A-A-B-A-A-A-A
you are afraid that one player might be :
83-85-90-63-95-95-95
the other could be:
84-86-91-64-96-96-96
And if you pick the wrong one, it would sting
As a coach I might not love this either but its reality of the NFL draft.
How does Trevor Lawrence look today?
We were all told he was a can't miss generational talent....hmmm, not so much yet.

At least admit you hate it for selfish reasons

To accent this, here's an article about the results of NFL 1st round picks (https://www.dailynorseman.com/2022/4/26 ... -very-high):

Five years ago I did a piece detailing how most draft picks are busts, based on a study of 1996-2016 draft picks. The results, which are based on the Pro Football Reference AV metric, are sobering:

16.7% didn’t play for the team that drafted them
37% were considered useless. They either didn’t play much or didn’t make the team.
15.3% were considered poor. Had limited playing time and didn’t do well in the time they had.
10.5% were considered average. These are mediocre players that had starts or significant contributions over 2-3 years.
12.3% were considered good. These could be mediocre or average players that were multi-year starters, Pat Elflein or Christian Ponder for example, or perhaps some genuinely good players that didn’t last all that long for the team that drafted them- Sidney Rice for example. This is where the AV metric can over-rate a player based on the number of starts, rather than their performance while on the field.
6.9% were considered Great. This category is the first that includes undeniably good draft picks. In order to be considered great, they would’ve had to play for the team that drafted them into a second contract, and also performed well over those years.
1% were considered legendary. These are future Hall of Famers, multi-year All-Pros among the best in the league for most of their relatively long careers.

James, if GMs/scouts/coaches knew all the potential risks / rewards for players, these metrics wouldn't exist. Like Rich said, if you don't want variables bc you don't want because you don't want to ever make a draft mistake, that's fair enough... but don't try to assert that the NFL already knows everything about rookies - its quite the opposite in fact. Variables will cause some underperforming 1st round picks, but you'll also have 2nd/3rd round players who far exceed their expectations so it balances out both ways and is much more representative of true NFL drafting results.

[Jerry-Redskins]

Not gonna argue the bust piece, but most players don't stay in the PNFL either. PNFL or NFL, lesser players are cut. Now when you draft them and they are cut is a different argument, but the numbers in themselves would need to do a round comparison to matter and I assume more PNFL 3rd rounders hang around longer, but plenty of mistakes in the the PNFL draft every season and later picks that drop and shouldn't. So James in not completely wrong.

I'm pretty agnostic to the draft proposal, but it would add another level of challenge as James noted and I would expect over time the best mangers would widen their gap over the poor ones once they figure out the nuances of Rich's proposal.

[Matt-Jacksonville]

Also, you have to account for did the player get drafted into the right system for them to succeed? Drew Brees is a good example. He sucked in San Diego, but switched systems and flourished. Would Joe Montana have flourished in an Air Raid system? Would Brady have flourished anywhere else besides New England? Granted some players transcend and still perform well, but what would Barry Sanders have done with the 90's Dallas Cowboy's OL or the 80's Washington OL?

[James-Eagles]

You are missing variables. There is countless variables in sitituations(other players skill, Coaching, system, locker room, etc.)So yes if you take everyone it does looks like the draft is a craft shoot. Cleveland never hits on a QB but Packers almost always do. Pittsburgh always hits on WR but Baltimore can't. Do we think this is random and they just get lucky or is it something other than the draft being a crapshoot.

Darnold 7th in Qb Rating with Minnesota but a bust on 2 teams before that. People like the narritive that draft is a crap shoot but you have to assume situtation doesn't matter to see that. When you start adding variables you start to see that players are bust a lot of time for reasons that can be seen. If it is player attitude, situtation, work effort, etc. but the crap shoot is more for the player coming out than the team drafting the player.

Mahomes is prime example. He was draft to a team with Andy Reid as a coach Alex Smith to mentor with Hill, hunt and Kelce as skill player plus a decent OL. If he is taken in any of the picks before that there is a decent chance he might be a bust.

Prescot and Russell WIlson aren't any where near the QBs they become if not put in the perfect situtation. Draft is a science not a crap shoot. There is a reason some teams master and others don't. Just like PNFL teams do better than others in the draft. Ever notice that the same teams keep winning and the same teams keep losing. If the draft worked that wouldn't happen. The teams that are consistantly good draft well.

[Donovon-Steelers]

Nobody is saying the draft is a total crap shoot -- its an inexact science made fallible by human error and the inability to predict the future of the player's desire, coaching motivation, team chemistry, injuries, personal issues, etc. We don't have those elements - everyone knows exactly how the player will compete vs his peers because we know every rating and this game is mathematical.

Masking 1 of 8 rating elements for the draftee doesn't make it suddenly them a question mark - they will probably perform exactly as expected 90% of the time. But what it will do is allow real-life variations where some players will underperform/overperform, deviating from expectations.

[Rich-League Officer]

Not gonna argue the bust piece, but most players don't stay in the PNFL either. PNFL or NFL, lesser players are cut. Now when you draft them and they are cut is a different argument, but the numbers in themselves would need to do a round comparison to matter and I assume more PNFL 3rd rounders hang around longer, but plenty of mistakes in the the PNFL draft every season and later picks that drop and shouldn't. So James in not completely wrong.

I'm pretty agnostic to the draft proposal, but it would add another level of challenge as James noted and I would expect over time the best mangers would widen their gap over the poor ones once they figure out the nuances of Rich's proposal.

The added level of challenge/luck is what would be fun if you ask me.
And, over time it would be IMPOSSIBLE to figure out the nuance because only one person knows.

In my example:
If you get the #1 pick in the draft and there are 2 WRs sitting there and they look similar in actuals but both their pots say this:
A-A-A-B-A-A-A-A
Your best/worst calculations (IF you actually do them) would be:
83-85-90-63-95-95-95
the other could be:
84-86-91-64-96-96-96

Unless Justin/Thomas/Mitch is psychic or hacks my system, they would have no idea what the players pots are.

Is this more work for the GM? Yes
Do you have the time? Maybe
Would there be more mistakes YES
Of course we already take 3-10 days for the draft so its not like anyone is rushed.
Calculations could be made pick by pick based on your board.

One example of Luck that we do use is the lottery. I'm fairly sure a couple coaches lamented that they traded away a pick that became the lottery winner. This idea is just an extension of that. Oh shit, I took the wrong WR and he got the stud. Happens in the NFL all the time. In the 2023 Draft, Carolina got the #1 pick thanks to Houston winning their last game in 2022 giving them #2. Everyone said, how stupid are they? had #1 locked in and they blew it because Bryce Young was the stud. Supposedly they tried to trade up to take him. Failed and took CJ Stroud. How has that worked out? It was luck.

I think it's okay to admit that you like the certainty and hate the randomness of 2 players with nothing guiding the decision.

[Dean-Atlanta]

What Rich talks about STILL happens in our current draft system WITHOUT hiding pots.

Charlie released the draft pool and I had decided (for better or worse) I absolutely decided I wanted to draft WR Rome Odunze in the first round of the draft. I was 5-8 and seemed destined to not the make the playoffs, so I thought finishing 5-11 make it more like I could draft Odunze in the first round. So I backed off of making any effort to win, or as Rich said on Discord on night, I was "tanking the right way" as opposed to one team that sent in a profile allegedly that insured tanking. I finished 5-11 and scored the 4th pick overall. There were 3 solid defensive players I expected to go 1-2-3 and I would draft Odunze.

James traded up to #3 overall, and traded The King's Ransom to do it. He could afford to do that and more power to him. I figured if he took Odunze, which I thought was possible, I would draft Xavier Wirthy at #4. I would not have been surprised if he took Worthy, the 2 were arguably 1A and 1B at the WR position, but I thought Odunze's number were more balanced overall even though he's 83 SP rather than 84.

James took Odune and I took Worthy.

Here are there current season stats:

25 Odunze, Rome PHI R WR 25 335 13.4 53 4

** Worthy, Xavier ATL R WR 12 228 19.0 88 1

Worthy is WR1 in an offense where lots of A and A plays are called, featuring the WR3 or WR2 as the primary receiver and first receiver checked most often. Odunze is WR2 for Philly and clearly plays an important role in the passing offense for his team.

You all can judge for yourselves which team may have made the better choice. But keep in mind Worthy plays for 15th rated passing offense in the league and Odunze plays for the 16th rated passing offense, rated by team QB ratings. ATL is ranked 16 in first downs, Philly 2nd. ATL 14th in scoring, Philly 6th. ATL is 12th in passing yards, Philly is 4th. Philly is the better coached and more successful team of the two this season.

Would it have been any different if Philly drafted Worthy and ATL drafted Odunze?

[Rich-League Officer]

Dean, I suppose if you just look at stats, then yes we have lots of booms and busts.
It is a way of looking at it.
But, the player is not the bust, it's the coach.

Because nobody in this league has ever made a trade based on players stats.
In the NFL teams do look at the players ability and also his production on the field. There other factors as well.
But in the PNFL, it's 100% players attributes.

If James WR Odunze had 10 rec and 20 yds and 0 TDs, he's still a 1st rd talent and he could get a first rd pick + for him.
Stats are meaningless in this equation.