Lineup: Player at out of assigned position

[PaperLions]

I’m not referring to something crazy like a QB playing DE4 or something obvious like playing a “Guard” only at either right or left Guard…..is it ok to move players to positions that my defensive/offensive lineup “suggests” in the drop down menu - for example, when selecting an OLB, the drop down menu lists any SS and FS not already in my starting lineup.

The bigger more general question I have is….is it an acceptable option to use any out of position player that is listed in the drop down menu for that position? I understand there is a performance “penalty” for starting a SS at OLB. Is it a good guideline to only start players out of position that are on the drop down menu or am I better off using a Street Free agent.

[UmmBerrto]

Good question.

To date, street free agents have performed well above the expected average.

I once thought about stripping a team and starting all SFA at every position just to see what would the outcome be.

Having said all that, Mr. Cox has been sighted as saying he plans to reduce the effectiveness of said SFA in this coming update.

So, only he could really answer the question, because he is the only one who has any idea what the actual SFA performance scale will be from now on.

Good thing is once it's all ready to go, we can run the challenge game simulations and get an idea.

[PaperLions]

Good info…..thank you.

[ddeyarman]

Yeah. And wha is really interesting is players who bounce between positions during the season, such as DT/DE, or T/G. It feels like they shouldn't be penalized, but maybe they are somewhat?

[Kevin]

Yeah. And wha is really interesting is players who bounce between positions during the season, such as DT/DE, or T/G. It feels like they shouldn't be penalized, but maybe they are somewhat?

Yeah, unfortunately that's how it works. Otherwise we would have to manually make judgments on each player. So we have to assign them to a position, and then they face a performance degradation if they play somewhere else. The good news is that we base the degradation on the position similarities. Moving a 4-3 DT to a 3-4 DE or a SS to a FS isn't a huge degradation.

The challenge is the one or two guys who play really disparate positions, like Taysom Hill. We can't really reflect his performance at both positions.

[Samdarnoldsucks21]

I might suggest using pff and basing the penalties on how many snaps a player played at that position

[UmmBerrto]

I will say this.

I do not understand why you feel the need to institute penalties.

Won't the natural abilities and skills play themselves out?

For instance, a tackle playing TE.

Won't the tackle naturally be a much better blocker and a much worse receiver without any adjustments made by you?

Or a DT a poor LB with nothing adjustable by you?

What are you penalizing and why?

[Kingswood]

I will say this.

I do not understand why you feel the need to institute penalties.

Won't the natural abilities and skills play themselves out?

For instance, a tackle playing TE.

Won't the tackle naturally be a much better blocker and a much worse receiver without any adjustments made by you?

Or a DT a poor LB with nothing adjustable by you?

What are you penalizing and why?

You don't understand why a program code simulating a DT should perform worse at LB?

[UmmBerrto]

You don't understand why a program code simulating a DT should perform worse at LB?



What I am asking is, I don't see why Mr. Cox needed to add a specific penalty?

Should not the DT automatically be slower?

Should not the DT automatically be a liability in pass coverage.

Let me see if I can step away from the assumption of arrogance, because I know men look at men in assuming ways.

Let's take basic Madden ratings.

Speed is speed, it doesn't matter the position, all the speeds of all the players are on the same 0-99 scale.

Clearly a CB a LB and a DT have different speed ratings automatically.

But a CB that is a 99 in speed, is a 99 wherever he plays.

A DT that is a 65 speed is a 65 speed whenever he plays.

Subsequently a CB may be a 45 in strength
While a DT may be a 99 in strength.

So I understand why they play different at different positions.


What I am asking Mr. Cox, is why is there a separate programed penalty?

That sounds like Mr. Cox has mandated that because a player is out of position he must be penalized extra....

I may be miss understanding what is being said.



Because, on the flip side.

If the SF 49ers decided to change Trent Williams's number and play him as a TE and run what would be a six man offensive line all season.

Yes, Trent would certainly be a liability as a receiver, compared to Kittle, however, If the 9rs use him as a blocker, would not the TE position he is playing instantly become the absolute best and most dominant pass and run blocking TE in the game?

What extra penalty is there to be assessed in this situation?

I am asking, do not the numbers play out on their own?

[tophardtjr]

I 100% agree with Umberto on this

[Kingswood]

What I am asking is, I don't see why Mr. Cox needed to add a specific penalty?

Should not the DT automatically be slower?

Should not the DT automatically be a liability in pass coverage.

Let me see if I can step away from the assumption of arrogance, because I know men look at men in assuming ways.

Let's take basic Madden ratings.

Speed is speed, it doesn't matter the position, all the speeds of all the players are on the same 0-99 scale.

Clearly a CB a LB and a DT have different speed ratings automatically.

But a CB that is a 99 in speed, is a 99 wherever he plays.

A DT that is a 65 speed is a 65 speed whenever he plays.

Subsequently a CB may be a 45 in strength
While a DT may be a 99 in strength.

So I understand why they play different at different positions.


What I am asking Mr. Cox, is why is there a separate programed penalty?

That sounds like Mr. Cox has mandated that because a player is out of position he must be penalized extra....

I may be miss understanding what is being said.



Because, on the flip side.

If the SF 49ers decided to change Trent Williams's number and play him as a TE and run what would be a six man offensive line all season.

Yes, Trent would certainly be a liability as a receiver, compared to Kittle, however, If the 9rs use him as a blocker, would not the TE position he is playing instantly become the absolute best and most dominant pass and run blocking TE in the game?

What extra penalty is there to be assessed in this situation?

I am asking, do not the numbers play out on their own?

I think there's a few concept errors here. First this only seems to work on a rating system, which this isn't. It's based on player data from the previous year. There is no 98 speed rating or 75 catching, it's performance based.

I'd also like to point out that Madden does absolutely penalize players for being out of position. TE's will have a lower OVR in a WR position, LT's will have a lower OVR at TE, hell WR's OVR is even determined by the slot position. The pass block rating itself may not vary from T to TE but the grade drop/penalty is definitely there.

Some other things to consider are size grades. Your DT may be a beast at stuffing the run so maybe you want to pull him back to ILB. The problem with that is obviously his size and speed would be taken advantage of. Since there are no ratings to incorporate things like weight, height, build, athleticism, etc., they used a penalty percentage instead. It's not at all far-fetched to expect a DT to perform worse at LB or even DE. I could have an amazing receiving back but that doesn't mean he'd be great at WR. My RB may have graded well at receiving due to mismatches with LB's. If we were to use a rating scale instead, say my RB had 85 Catching, it would be based off his matchups with linebackers. If I were to put him out wide, odds are his performance grades would significantly dip. Similarly if I put LJ at RB, his rushing wouldn't be nearly as effective since teams wouldn't need to drop back to cover the pass. It's all pretty simple really.

[UmmBerrto]

I think there's a few concept errors here. First this only seems to work on a rating system, which this isn't. It's based on player data from the previous year. There is no 98 speed rating or 75 catching, it's performance based.

I'd also like to point out that Madden does absolutely penalize players for being out of position. TE's will have a lower OVR in a WR position, LT's will have a lower OVR at TE, hell WR's OVR is even determined by the slot position. The pass block rating itself may not vary from T to TE but the grade drop/penalty is definitely there.

Some other things to consider are size grades. Your DT may be a beast at stuffing the run so maybe you want to pull him back to ILB. The problem with that is obviously his size and speed would be taken advantage of. Since there are no ratings to incorporate things like weight, height, build, athleticism, etc., they used a penalty percentage instead. It's not at all far-fetched to expect a DT to perform worse at LB or even DE. I could have an amazing receiving back but that doesn't mean he'd be great at WR. My RB may have graded well at receiving due to mismatches with LB's. If we were to use a rating scale instead, say my RB had 85 Catching, it would be based off his matchups with linebackers. If I were to put him out wide, odds are his performance grades would significantly dip. Similarly if I put LJ at RB, his rushing wouldn't be nearly as effective since teams wouldn't need to drop back to cover the pass. It's all pretty simple really.



First Question.

Are the things your saying actually factual based on this specific game that Mr. Cox is building and it's specific programing, or are you giving your opinion, and assumptions?

Have you seen the programing, or has Mr. Cox told you these specific facts in the past?

This must first be established before we can continue...

[Samdarnoldsucks21]

I agree with UmmBerrtos take here, Players like Jeremy chinn have a high speed for a saftey but are larger and could play linebacker. I feel like he shouldn't be getting the same penalty as everyone else if hes lining up more at linebacker than saftey.

[Kingswood]

First Question.

Are the things your saying actually factual based on this specific game that Mr. Cox is building and it's specific programing, or are you giving your opinion, and assumptions?

Have you seen the programing, or has Mr. Cox told you these specific facts in the past?

This must first be established before we can continue...

These are assumptions based off the manual, the video, and their own words in the discussions.

Much of this is obvious.

[Kingswood]

I agree with UmmBerrtos take here, Players like Jeremy chinn have a high speed for a saftey but are larger and could play linebacker. I feel like he shouldn't be getting the same penalty as everyone else if hes lining up more at linebacker than saftey.

They already specified they don't do it on a player by player basis. Also safety and linebacker are not the same thing. I'm not putting Richard Sherman at LB but he's definitely been at S. It doesn't make sense to code player by player, year by year, position by position, in this format.

[Chilly]

UmmBerto...I see your point, but I "believe" the answer is you are comparing Madden and its ratings based program to Sandbox and its stats based program. In some positions it would happen just as you stated. If you put an OL into TE, you would likely get exactly as you described. That OL likely has zero receptions, but a whole lot of blocking information. He would perform well in blocking but not get you a whole lot of receptions. He would not have a "speed" rating (in madden you might have an OL with 50 sp and a TE with 70 speed...this would create the disparity along with catch rating...Sandbox doesn't have these ratings). For closely related positions like DE/DT, the "important" stats for the position would be similar and so they should crossover more closely. The penalty would account for ability changes. For example a DT would not make a good LB while using similar performance stats: tackles and sacks. So a penalty would make up for the stats relationship for the positions and the ability difference.

[UmmBerrto]

UmmBerto...I see your point, but I "believe" the answer is you are comparing Madden and its ratings based program to Sandbox and its stats based program. In some positions it would happen just as you stated. If you put an OL into TE, you would likely get exactly as you described. That OL likely has zero receptions, but a whole lot of blocking information. He would perform well in blocking but not get you a whole lot of receptions. He would not have a "speed" rating (in madden you might have an OL with 50 sp and a TE with 70 speed...this would create the disparity along with catch rating...Sandbox doesn't have these ratings). For closely related positions like DE/DT, the "important" stats for the position would be similar and so they should crossover more closely. The penalty would account for ability changes. For example a DT would not make a good LB while using similar performance stats: tackles and sacks. So a penalty would make up for the stats relationship for the positions and the ability difference.



My question then is, if it's stats based, then again why the penalty across the board?

For instance, if a typical MLB has 110-130 tackles in a full season and a typical DT has 50-60, tackles with the same snap count, doesn't that already play out without any adjustments?

I mean, based on the productivity per snap, would not the DT automatically have poorer production as a MLB?

The fact that statistics show the LB with 30 passes defended and the DT with Zero passes defended, doesn't that already play out in the statistics and as such, the algorithm of the game?

Personally, just so we understand, I don't think a player should play a DT at LB, I am just using this specific comparison...

My actual question is based specifically on playing offensive lineman at the TE position and seeing no advantage in the running game.

Infact, playing offensive lineman as TE in the running game, appears to be detrimental, as best as I can tell so far.

On one of my teams, I have eight All Pro caliber offensive lineman playing the starting offensive line and all three TE positions and I have an All Pro FB and HB, However, the production is 1-2 yards per carry at best.

I am having a hard time understanding that logic.

[UmmBerrto]

They already specified they don't do it on a player by player basis. Also safety and linebacker are not the same thing. I'm not putting Richard Sherman at LB but he's definitely been at S. It doesn't make sense to code player by player, year by year, position by position, in this format.


In case you did not notice LB Simmons of the AZ Cardinals made the switch to CB last season.

And he was dominant.

Box safeties can definitely play LB, what do you think the 46 defense is?

The safety #46 was walked into the box to play LB while the two OLB blitzed.

Also, didn't NFL linebacker Brian Urlacher play A lot of Safety At New Mexico?

I'm just saying, if it's stats based, the stats should be the determining factor.

If one guy is a beast, and performs well above average at one position, such as Aaron Donald, he would probably play very well at another position based on effectiveness of snap count.

Is there anyone here who doesn't think AD would be a pretty good MLB? His stats would make him a pretty good MLB at best, great in the run game, great as a blitzer and trash in pass coverage, isn't that exact what AD would be as A MLB in real life?

Why would there be an added penalty needed?

JJ Watt can do it, Reggie White could do it.
The guys who had the stats to do it, did it, and the guys who did not have the stats to do it couldn't do it.

What am I missing?

Help me understand, I am not being sarcastic, I am really trying to get my mind around this particular issue.

[PaperLions]

Yeah, unfortunately that's how it works. The challenge is the one or two guys who play really disparate positions, like Taysom Hill. We can't really reflect his performance at both positions.

Do you know what position Taysom Hill will be assigned to for this season yet?

[UmmBerrto]

Yeah, unfortunately that's how it works. Otherwise we would have to manually make judgments on each player. So we have to assign them to a position, and then they face a performance degradation if they play somewhere else. The good news is that we base the degradation on the position similarities. Moving a 4-3 DT to a 3-4 DE or a SS to a FS isn't a huge degradation.

The challenge is the one or two guys who play really disparate positions, like Taysom Hill. We can't really reflect his performance at both positions.



Let me ask you a question....

Does a Tackle get a performance degradation when playing Guard???

The reason I ask, is most Guards are Tackles that could not handle the island.

So how can you take performance away from a good tackle that plays Guard, if anything, would you agree that a Tackle that moves Inside should get a performance boost.

Guards are usually the worst of the online, not good enough or the right size to play Tackle and not smart enough to play Center.

So, a center that moves to guard or a tackle that moves to guard should definitely get a boost up, not a penalty down.

[tophardtjr]

They already specified they don't do it on a player by player basis. Also safety and linebacker are not the same thing. I'm not putting Richard Sherman at LB but he's definitely been at S. It doesn't make sense to code player by player, year by year, position by position, in this format.

There are safeties turned into LB'S every year, and LB'S are turned into safeties every year it happens!

[Reggy]

I’m gonna start a punter at QB and see if he can throw more picks than Dak

[Kingswood]

In case you did not notice LB Simmons of the AZ Cardinals made the switch to CB last season.

And he was dominant.

Box safeties can definitely play LB, what do you think the 46 defense is?

The safety #46 was walked into the box to play LB while the two OLB blitzed.

Also, didn't NFL linebacker Brian Urlacher play A lot of Safety At New Mexico?

I'm just saying, if it's stats based, the stats should be the determining factor.

If one guy is a beast, and performs well above average at one position, such as Aaron Donald, he would probably play very well at another position based on effectiveness of snap count.

Is there anyone here who doesn't think AD would be a pretty good MLB? His stats would make him a pretty good MLB at best, great in the run game, great as a blitzer and trash in pass coverage, isn't that exact what AD would be as A MLB in real life?

Why would there be an added penalty needed?

JJ Watt can do it, Reggie White could do it.
The guys who had the stats to do it, did it, and the guys who did not have the stats to do it couldn't do it.

What am I missing?

Help me understand, I am not being sarcastic, I am really trying to get my mind around this particular issue.

I get it.

I'm not denying the ability for some to make the transition. I'm just saying that from what they've described they didn't go into detail with each individual. Most either play one position or another. Urlacher, Watt, Reggie White, these are the exceptions. Since Sandbox positions are based on snap count, I believe it's their way to minimize GM's taking advantage of players with overblown percentages. That being said, perhaps a snap count penalty would be better than a positional one.

[UmmBerrto]

I get it.

I'm not denying the ability for some to make the transition. I'm just saying that from what they've described they didn't go into detail with each individual. Most either play one position or another. Urlacher, Watt, Reggie White, these are the exceptions. Since Sandbox positions are based on snap count, I believe it's their way to minimize GM's taking advantage of players with overblown percentages. That being said, perhaps a snap count penalty would be better than a positional one.

From what you are saying, it's already based on Snap counts and production.

You say these great players are the exception, but that is exactly the case I am making, for those that are the exception, it should play out, and for those in the category of the norm, it should also play out.

Players can play "out of position" and the game today actually requires it for many players.

I would suggest position penalties be removed, there is no place for them in a game like this.

Leatherwood was an absolute disaster at tackle, but he was able to get hundreds of snaps at Guard for the Raiders.

He was still pretty bad as a guard, but way much better as a guard than a Tackle.

So then, why should he be penalized for playing out of position, when in reality it helped his production, as with any Tackle that moves to guard?

I remember the 90's when Dave Wannstedt would blitz his two corners and drop his two DT into zone coverage.

This game is cool and all, however, if you continue to institute unilateral position penalties, there is no real ingenuity left in the hands of the GM/HC.

At that point, it really isn't a game a chess any longer, it's a child's game of tic tac toe.

We are all left with the only option to try and do the exact same thing the other guy is trying to do.

What kind of alternative reality is that?

What's the point?

Each team is an attempt to make a carbon copy of what the program says will work and then the random program picks a winner each week.

Might as well play Tecmo Bowl.

Give the human client back the ability to build "his" team, rather than make the player figure out an acceptable combination that pleases the algorithm, which therefore pleases the programmer.

I understand that there was a lot of things that happened over the last decade, that I have no idea about to make the game we all enjoy today.

I understand that those things contributed to the changes that were made.

I understand that as the programmers, Mr. Cox/Kevin and any others, know why they've made those changes five, six, or seven years ago.

All I am saying, is that some of those changes must needs be revisited and adjusted to the realities of today, and the benefits of game play in this alternative reality.

Again, I ask, do tackles playing guard get penalized or do they get a performance boost?

Because the reality of NFL football is that a Tackle who moves inside to guard plays better as a Guard.

Does a Center who moves to Guard get penalized or does he get a boost?

Because the NFL game shows that a Center is usually a bit more athletic than a guard because he has to move quicker and usually much more intelligent, because he has to read the defense and call out blocking adjustments.

Does a DT playing DE get penalized, somehow making him a less effective run stuffer?

Justin Fields just Broke many records running the football as a QB, and his passing stats are already what they are, is the program going to reduce Justin's passing profile if he runs for a thousand yards in the sim? Because that is what happened last year with Lamar...


So again, when was the last time these position penalties were laid out for analysis?

Also, when that does happen, I would like to be involved.

Infact, many others should be involved.

"That's just my opinion, I could be wrong."

-Dennis Miller -