+- International Simulation Football League (https://forums.sim-football.com)
+-- Forum: Community (https://forums.sim-football.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Media (https://forums.sim-football.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Graded Articles (https://forums.sim-football.com/forumdisplay.php?fid=38)
+---- Thread: *Comparing Defensive Ends from old sim to new sim (/showthread.php?tid=34414)
*Comparing Defensive Ends from old sim to new sim - JuOSu - 08-22-2021
In my other article that I just posted, I received the following comment from @Pat and I figured that I would collect more data and farm another article out of this as a response to some of his claims, because while he presented some basic data, I figure I can properly respond by going into the numbers in detail. Here is his comment first:
"So I've heard it thrown around a few times that the new sim hurt DE a bunch, but no one ahs really said why exactly. When you compare the position as a whole pre and post sim switch, Defensive Ends went from being tackle and TFL focused to much better pass rushers. Heck, going back a few seasons pre-switch, you would see one, sometimes two, DE get double digit sacks in a season (a lot of times no DE would break 10 in a season) as opposed to now where it is commonplace to see multiple DE getting 12+ sacks in a season.
I think the belief that somehow they're worse comes down to a few things: 1) not every team runs a four man front anymore, and when DE are put more on the interior is changes their impact on the game and 2) the league is much much much more of a pass-happy league now, meaning that there are just less chances for TFL in general - for reference, in S22 the lowest rushing attempts by a team was 344. That would have been good enough for 8th most in S30. Arizona led the league with 437 rushing attempts this season, and in S22 there would have been 6 out of the 12 teams that had more carries than that.
Do DE stats look different? Of course. I can understand that being a bit of a system shock when their stats were pretty static for 26 seasons. But now instead of being the big, nasty run stuffers that get lots of tackles and TFL, they've shifted into more pass rushers that get sacks and force fumbles. Different doesn't mean worse."
In general, I want to start off by saying that I do agree with some of what he said. Just because something is different doesn't mean it is also worse. I totally get that and agree with that statement. I do think that ultimately being similar would be good, because people created in a particular position for a reason, but I do agree that just being different doesn't mean worse. As he points out, now the stats for DE do look different. We will go into the differences in a moment.
First off, let me present just basic data on how DE stats changed from old sim to new sim before going into any analysis.
I took the top 20 Defensive Ends in each of the four stats we will look at and compiled an average for them for four seasons each (S27-S30 for new sim, S23-S26 for old sim).
Here are the averages:
Old sim: 49.5 tackles, 14.0 tackles for loss, 0.875 forced fumbles, 6.5 sacks
New sim: 41.0 tackles, 4.8 tackles for loss, 1.8875 forced fumbles, 8.5 sacks
At first glance, a lot of Pat talked about turns out to be correct. In the new sim, DEs do indeed have less tackles and less tackles for loss, but more forced fumbles and more sacks.
You can obviously argue about this in different ways, but personally I would argue that I don't think 2 extra sacks and one more forced fumble are worth 9 tackles for loss and 8.5 tackles. In my eyes, this is not just a case of different, but additionally also worse. Forced fumbles may be the one I will give to you most, as the one extra forced fumble is still more than double what it used to be. I would argue one potential extra turnover doesn't fully negate the changes, but at least that is a palpable change. But the two extra sacks feel like they are negated by some of your own commentary. You claim there is much more passing now and therefore less tackles for loss. I would argue the same would mean there are more sacks now, which would explain some of the extra sacks that way. But let's look at that claim in more detail too:
The average team in the old sim in those four seasons had 553 pass attempts, in the new sim it was 622, which is about 112%. So if 6.5 sacks was expected because of the pass attempts, the new sim should have 112% of those, which would be 7.35. Obviously 8.5 is more than that, so sacks did increase, but less than maybe it seemed at first glance.
On the other hand, the average team in the old sim in those four seasons had 495 rush attempts, while in the new sim they had 350, which makes it about 70% of that. If we take the old number of tackles for loss at 14 and take 70% of those, we would reach an expected tackle for loss of 9.8 - instead Defensive Ends have an average of 4.8
Basically, while some of the difference in stats is explained by the changes in strategy, it clearly shows that the changes are not just from that, but rather from a completely different way that this position is handled in the sim.
The other difference is that to compare them to the changes linebacker went through. When you look at roughly the top 20 best players in each category for each of those seasons (I say roughly, because sometimes people are tied for a spot so you have more than 20), here are the changes in numbers from old sim to new sim:
With tackles for loss, Defensive Ends went from 19.5 out of the top 20 players to now having 6.5 of the top 20 players. Meanwhile Linebackers went from 0 in the old sim to now 9.75
With Forced Fumbles, Defensive Ends went from 4.5 to now 4.75, while Linebackers went from 6.75 to 9.25
With Sacks, Defensive Ends went from 4.5 to now 7, while Linebackers went from 8.25 to now 13
Defensive ends didn't necessarily even have the worst changes, Defensive Tackles are almost even worse, but yeah defensive Ends had their own thing at least with tackles for losses, something that is insanely reduced now, while linebackers gain yet another category in which they dominate in or are at least evenly matched. And your perceived improvements at forced fumbles and sacks, while slightly there, are still less improvement than linebackers have seen.
So yeah, ultimately, this isn't just a case of different but still the same. This is absolutely different but worse.
I wrote the top 20 or so Defensive Ends in TPE currently and asked them which player they would rather be based on the averages I showed before. Of those that replied to me so far, 9 picked the old player's stats, while only 3 picked the new player's stats.
RE: Comparing Defensive Ends from old sim to new sim - Pat - 08-23-2021
Well that's definitely more work than I put into my research! I think if you want to go down the rabbit hole even further, you need to compare DE's on teams that predominantly run a 4-3 defense and compare those to the old sim. But, what would take a ton of time to do so, um, no thanks.
On the second point about comparing LBs to DEs, I totally agree. I think once again part of it is that LB blitzes are more valuable now with 3-4 being a viable defense (and with the plethora of LBs these days it's not hard to find bodies for it), but also, LBs could be just a little on the strong side.
RE: Comparing Defensive Ends from old sim to new sim - JuOSu - 08-23-2021
(08-23-2021, 06:49 AM)Pat Wrote: Well that's definitely more work than I put into my research! I think if you want to go down the rabbit hole even further, you need to compare DE's on teams that predominantly run a 4-3 defense and compare those to the old sim. But, what would take a ton of time to do so, um, no thanks.
On the second point about comparing LBs to DEs, I totally agree. I think once again part of it is that LB blitzes are more valuable now with 3-4 being a viable defense (and with the plethora of LBs these days it's not hard to find bodies for it), but also, LBs could be just a little on the strong side.
Appreciate you reading it!
RE: Comparing Defensive Ends from old sim to new sim - Pat - 08-23-2021
Absolutely! I love reading stuff like this (when it has numbers and research attached!).