Offensive line averages

[sportznut]

Troy, I don't disagree with the general premise, nor was I suggesting that we shouldn't have centers.

Here's my gripe though:

Even as a longtime member of these leagues, one can't expect me to remember every rule in this league. We do our best to mirror the NFL, yet quirky setups like allowing teams to run an offense with 3 or even 4 prominent TEs in their offense, but the depth chart doesn't allow for 5 WRs, which are utilized in the NFL from time to time. The only time you'll ever see a 3 TE setup is in redzone/goal line situations.

If you click on the depth chart, nowhere does it specify you must have "x" number of players for your offensive line grade. Now, I'm not dumb. I know enough to know we should have one each at T, G, and C. But I figured without any specification, the other two starting spots might be flex spots, as nothing says they're not.

Click on the rules link, and saying they're outdated and don't offer much would be an understatement.

So, here I am on draft day, on the clock, staring right at Chance Warmack. Now, I know damned well I have two elite guards on my team already in Ben Grubbs, and Andy Levitre. Both are signed to LTCs, and going nowhere, but without any specifics for the o-line listed like every other grouping on the DC, why not draft the best offensive lineman on the board regardless of position, and have a starting unit of one center, one tackle, and 3 guards, should Warmack's grade be higher than MIchael Oher.

Yes, I agree if we're talking about average players across the line, an average guard isn't going to be able to play LT, but he could certainly play RT or center. An average LT could play RT or both guard positions. And I'd argue that an average center could play both guard spots.

Even so, no one can convince me that one or both of my elite guards couldn't handle one of the tackle positions on my line.

Again, all of this should be moot anyways with nothing in the rules link or on the DC stating otherwise.

Furthermore, while I'd agree that guards don't often move to LT, I wouldn't say its never happened. In fact, just this offseason the GB Packers have shuffled their entire line, moving Brian Bulaga, who's played guard and RT, to LT, and shifting Josh Sitton from RG to LG. Both players here have dual eligibility already, yet Bulaga moved from guard to tackle, not the other way around, while Sitton moved from tackle to guard.

http://www.packersnews.com/article/2013 ... ck_check=1

And yes, I know full well Warmack will still figure into my grade, doesn't the backup only get 50% of their grades? Again, I can't recall, and this information isn't readily available, which is why I'm asking. Certainly it makes a difference if my 5 best guys figure into my grade, and the 6th gets 50% of his grade, instead of having my 4 best, my 6th in the grade, and my 5th best grade only factored at 50%.

I'm not trying to be a pain in the ass, Troy, but I just don't think its fair to expect everyone to remember every rule in this league when they're not always easy to find even for a seasoned vet like myself. And I simply can't attempt to get an answer at the last minute when I'm literally on the clock for the draft, not knowing if Warmack was even going to be there.

Those are my issues, and concerns, so take it for what its worth.

[lucky7jc]

I can understand the draft concerns, and roster concerns but to me it seems that the league probably has at least a 40-50% toll of players OL that are dual eligibility positions. So in reality does it really matter? To me it seems that teams will use their best personnel how they see fit.

With that said does that mean we should isolate Gs & Ts as OL and isolate Centers specific. Or have specific scores at each position and make teams allot specific positions and either sacrifice the downgrade playing out of position requiring T G C G T just like real lineup.

Probably poll worthy

[Troy S]

That has come up at various times and places but separate grades for a player at different positions isn't a possibility with the current grades used I believe which provide one overall value for a player in general.

We get updates throughout the season Player X goes from 78 to 80. It's not 80 now at T and 83 now at guard. It's just one grade for each individual player as published by the league grade source.

Unless there are changes in grades used or data we get, one grade for each player is probably the way it has to be in the near term. I don't know that there is that multiple position data, but even if we did start using different grade data which had all that, it would be a massive undertaking to change how everything is calculated at this time. It's possible to make up our own grade deterioration from one position to another, but that adds complication and probably not ideal in that versatility is largely an individual skill determination and would come with a specific grade score at another place on the field where not everyone can move around equally well. We currently treat it individually and can add additional positions of eligibility on an individual basis where appropriate to do so. Yes, some great guards could be great tackles even if that's not the most common transition from league historical records. If that's the case on an individual basis, and something behind that from actual NFL actions/statements in that regard, that's something to look at individually in terms of positional eligibility.

The one place that might make sense to think about position to position transitions and grade impact might be on empty spots. Currently I have it just add in low graded backup as the default empty spot, and in some ways I think that's justified to penalize teams without depth or just reflect the tremendous impact of a rash of injuries at a position. It's easily resolved if desired by just signing the highest rated eligible player available in free agency at the time of injury to fill that spot above a default grade, but it might be something to consider to instead look at the grades from players in that area not necessarily eligible and deduct some of their grade for that transfer to a different spot.

I think this gets over-complicated at times, though...
We just try to keep it fairly straight forward, sticking primarily to the standard NFL starting positions. Team defense grades can't come from a team of fielding 11 nosetackles. Your offensive line can't be made up of 5 centers. Generally speaking, you need the standard NFL positions that make up standard lineups in our sim area grade calculations. There is limited flexibility around the edges due to us wanting to factor injury possibilities and most common player movement in such cases or not penalizing teams for having a lot of quality at the most valued positions historically within those areas with a strong history of movement to other slots, but standard NFL starting positions are primarily the main concept for your grade being made up from your players listed eligible to play those. Yes, the small areas for flexibility allowed probably could to be made clearer and it has been added to the depth chart page also, but for the most part if you build your team with the NFL standards in mind that's what we initially set out to measure.

[RebelFan]

Not sure why Bulaga was playing guard, what the circumstances were, but he was drafted as a tackle & played tackle all through college.

[sportznut]

Not sure why Bulaga was playing guard, what the circumstances were, but he was drafted as a tackle & played tackle all through college.

Not entirely true. Bulaga played guard as a freshman in college, and battled for the LG position as a rookie with the Packers.

http://gnb.scout.com/2/1289337.html

[Jared A]

My view is that most LT's should be rated for G and T. Maybe that's just me. I'm fine with requiring everyone to have a center... But, the move from Tackle to Guard is not something that players struggle with. Some guards aren't fast enough to be tackles... but Tackles are good enough to be guards.


If Warmack and Cooper had both been tackles, they would've gone 1 and 2 overall.

[Adam K]

My view is that most LT's should be rated for G and T. Maybe that's just me. I'm fine with requiring everyone to have a center... But, the move from Tackle to Guard is not something that players struggle with. Some guards aren't fast enough to be tackles... but Tackles are good enough to be guards.


If Warmack and Cooper had both been tackles, they would've gone 1 and 2 overall.

I would then argue that every guard could be a center.

[Jared A]

I would then argue that every guard could be a center.

I'm not sure what the arguement would be. Center is more of a specialized position. While it's not a fancy position, snapping the ball correctly, watching for blitzes, making sure blocking schemes are right ... things like that make it a very different position.

Now, Jonathan Cooper in this draft was given a lot of credit for his ability to play Center... so, I would say he should qualify as both. I wouldn't even say that most Tackles should qualify as Center... because you very rarely see that happen.

[Goodell]

The aim would be hopefully less arguements....

In essence, we do give added value to Tackles in a couple ways that requires more of their historically higher valued skills within the depth chart and we also allow them currently to shift into that flex Guard position. So essentially all highly rated Centers or Tackles can move into Guard by design per group discussions and thoughts at the time of league creation that you see a whole lot of that in reality and less of the other transitions on the whole. Because there are other cases of less common transitions, we allowed individual position eligibility adjustment to allow guys to move to different spots if that was part of their abilities.

As I was mentioning before, if we say all Guards can be Centers though then there's no need for anyone to sign any real Centers any more and that's unrealistic to me and devalues real Centers with high grades excelling at that spot. A lot of Guards do play some Center, though, or may move over to Center if injuries happen. If that's the case with a team's specific Guard who arguably should have Center eligibility, there's a process where teams can contact me and we can look into positions listed further and add that if applicable.

There's a lot of arguement and emotions about positions. That's why I'd really like to emphasize the point of trying keeping it simple and not getting lost in the fine print debates.

NFL teams that want to build a strong line need a good/great left tackle and another good one on the other side to keep the speedy pass rushers away. Our OL grades help our sim QBs, so if you don't have good tackles protecting the QB then he shouldn't be helped much. Can't take backup center and put him at LT can say we've got a great line that should help our QB stats. Tackles get paid the most and drafted the highest generally speaking with the most historic positional versatility. LT is arguably one of the most coveted team building positions in the game now outside of QB. We similarly put value on needing good tackles also when the game was setup. Our sim teams similarly are encouraged to have good tackles if they want a great line. As great tackles are the highest paid/valued in reality, we don't allow teams to replace tackle grades with lower priced position grades they might be able to acquire more affordably so we have more requirement to that position within the grade calculation.

Keeping it simple, build your line like the NFL does. That's what we always wanted to encourage. You need two tackles. You need a center. You need two guards. That's an NFL starting offensive line. And you need quality depth. If you have a whole lot of quality tackles or two strong centers, we will allow one of them to fill in at a guard spot as is commonly done in reality if you are weaker at that area than your best extra tackle or center. But you need all the elements of an NFL line to make a strong OL grade here by design.

[sportznut]

Keeping it simple, build your line like the NFL does. That's what we always wanted to encourage. You need two tackles. You need a center. You need two guards. That's an NFL starting offensive line. And you need quality depth. If you have a whole lot of quality tackles or two strong centers, we will allow one of them to fill in at a guard spot as is commonly done in reality if you are weaker at that area than your best extra tackle or center. But you need all the elements of an NFL line to make a strong OL grade here by design.

Sure, and the only guy who gets screwed is the one with strong guards, which is wrong.

We should be either required to have 2 Ts, a C, and 2 Gs, or we should be able to have 1 T, 1C, and 1G, with two other flex positions.

Instead, guards get the short end of the shaft even though there is plenty of evidence that they could play RT or C themselves. People want to lump the 2Ts together as if everyone here is starting two LTs, and that's clearly not the case.

I'm not arguing that most guards could play LT, but they most certainly could play RT. Across the board, no. You can always find examples of players who are very versatile, and some who could only play one position.

I just don't like the idea that everyone can move around the line EXCEPT guards.

And you still haven't addressed my question about it not being anywhere on the DCs or in the rules link.

Essentially, you're saying I'm screwed by having 3 quality guards on my team, and none of them would be capable of playing RT.

I couldn't disagree more.