05-07-2020, 08:15 PM
(This post was last modified: 05-07-2020, 08:22 PM by mithrandir.)
[div align=\\\"center\\\"]Background[/div]
The rise of the Statosaurus (@iStegosauruz) in just one season from sim league rookie to DSFL GM and revered sim-tester and casino odds-creator has inspired many. We are seeing more and more numbers-nerds and math-maniacs emerge and bring us high quality media content and informative information. As one who has now put the long days of writing, teaching, and grading behind me, I throw my hat into the ring of self-proclaimed nerds, and one who is willing to scour the depths of sim testing to obtain the information I desire. As some of my fellow nerds out there already know, Mithrandir is a name given by the Elves of Middle Earth to the Lord of the Rings wizard Gandalf. Therefore, I suggest the following name for my series of number-based and stat-based media articles which shall follow:
The Digit Wizard
The issue of archetype in this league poses an interesting challenge. We choose archetypes, positions, sizes, and starting stats as we are initiated into this league, often making those decisions with very little knowledge of their significance. The issue of archetype, however, does not really affect one's career for a little while, at least until we start hitting the cap for certain attributes. Now that many of my fellow S22 draftmates are beginning to hit caps, I had a question: did young Mithrandir choose correctly when deciding which archetype he would create his player as? No one seemed to have a sure answer for this question, though everyone assumed that the Man to Man Archetype was the best given the 100 speed cap against the 95 speed caps of the Zone and All-Around Archetypes. Today's simulation study examines the performance of cornerbacks that are maxed out in their respective archetypes.
Methodology
I took the week 4 sim file, and keeping all other strategies and depth charts the same, I adjusted the RCB and LCB of the New Orleans Second Line. Before testing, I changed the attributes of these cornerbacks, Deon Taylor and David Rector. I first changed their heights and weights to the maximum allowed under each archetype. Then I changed each relevant stat (I did not change passing, blocking, or kicking stats) to the maximum allowed under each archetype. Table 1 shows the max player at each archetype.
Table 1:
I ran 250 home game and 250 away game simulations with each archetype against all eleven other teams: that's 5,500 simulations per archetype, and 16,500 simulations total. For each batch of simulations I calculated point differential (PD), win percentage, and interceptions per game. My goal was to find out which archetype maximized both win percentage and individual statistics (interceptions).
Findings
I do not take much stock in how the team performed against individual teams, and do not speculate why certain archetypes outperformed the others against one franchise but not others. However, I still have all the data so I might as well share it with you. The following tables compare the nine relevant data points for each batch of simulations, separated by opponent.
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
The Important Table 13
Conclusions
1. In this study, I found that the archetypes exhibited very similar outcomes overall.
2. The man to man archetype had the highest winning percentage overall in the study by a margin of 0.64%, and zone beat out the all-around archetype by 0.83%.
3. The zone archetype had the most interceptions per game by a slim margin of 0.007 interceptions per game. This is intuitive, given the higher intelligence and hands of the zone archetype.
4. The differences between the archetypes are very small, despite being exaggerated by the attributes being applied to both starting corners. Essentially, the archetypes are well-balanced, and any maxed out player is a superstar who will help their team tremendously. The 100 speed of man to man is not a large advantage over the other archetypes once you factor in its deficiencies, particularly in intelligence and hands.
5. One minor point is that zone corners seem to be better on the road relative to their counterparts. I attribute this to the higher intelligence which likely commits fewer penalties which can be an issue in road games.
I hope that someone found this study beneficial. As my first ever use of the sim, this study was very time consuming relative to the word-count payout I will receive for this media. However, in my opinion, it has put to rest this issue of archetype and has eased my mind that I am not harming my team's chance for success by staying a zone cornerback.
The rise of the Statosaurus (@iStegosauruz) in just one season from sim league rookie to DSFL GM and revered sim-tester and casino odds-creator has inspired many. We are seeing more and more numbers-nerds and math-maniacs emerge and bring us high quality media content and informative information. As one who has now put the long days of writing, teaching, and grading behind me, I throw my hat into the ring of self-proclaimed nerds, and one who is willing to scour the depths of sim testing to obtain the information I desire. As some of my fellow nerds out there already know, Mithrandir is a name given by the Elves of Middle Earth to the Lord of the Rings wizard Gandalf. Therefore, I suggest the following name for my series of number-based and stat-based media articles which shall follow:
The Digit Wizard
The issue of archetype in this league poses an interesting challenge. We choose archetypes, positions, sizes, and starting stats as we are initiated into this league, often making those decisions with very little knowledge of their significance. The issue of archetype, however, does not really affect one's career for a little while, at least until we start hitting the cap for certain attributes. Now that many of my fellow S22 draftmates are beginning to hit caps, I had a question: did young Mithrandir choose correctly when deciding which archetype he would create his player as? No one seemed to have a sure answer for this question, though everyone assumed that the Man to Man Archetype was the best given the 100 speed cap against the 95 speed caps of the Zone and All-Around Archetypes. Today's simulation study examines the performance of cornerbacks that are maxed out in their respective archetypes.
Methodology
I took the week 4 sim file, and keeping all other strategies and depth charts the same, I adjusted the RCB and LCB of the New Orleans Second Line. Before testing, I changed the attributes of these cornerbacks, Deon Taylor and David Rector. I first changed their heights and weights to the maximum allowed under each archetype. Then I changed each relevant stat (I did not change passing, blocking, or kicking stats) to the maximum allowed under each archetype. Table 1 shows the max player at each archetype.
Table 1:
I ran 250 home game and 250 away game simulations with each archetype against all eleven other teams: that's 5,500 simulations per archetype, and 16,500 simulations total. For each batch of simulations I calculated point differential (PD), win percentage, and interceptions per game. My goal was to find out which archetype maximized both win percentage and individual statistics (interceptions).
Findings
I do not take much stock in how the team performed against individual teams, and do not speculate why certain archetypes outperformed the others against one franchise but not others. However, I still have all the data so I might as well share it with you. The following tables compare the nine relevant data points for each batch of simulations, separated by opponent.
Table 2
Table 3
Table 4
Table 5
Table 6
Table 7
Table 8
Table 9
Table 10
Table 11
Table 12
The Important Table 13
Conclusions
1. In this study, I found that the archetypes exhibited very similar outcomes overall.
2. The man to man archetype had the highest winning percentage overall in the study by a margin of 0.64%, and zone beat out the all-around archetype by 0.83%.
3. The zone archetype had the most interceptions per game by a slim margin of 0.007 interceptions per game. This is intuitive, given the higher intelligence and hands of the zone archetype.
4. The differences between the archetypes are very small, despite being exaggerated by the attributes being applied to both starting corners. Essentially, the archetypes are well-balanced, and any maxed out player is a superstar who will help their team tremendously. The 100 speed of man to man is not a large advantage over the other archetypes once you factor in its deficiencies, particularly in intelligence and hands.
5. One minor point is that zone corners seem to be better on the road relative to their counterparts. I attribute this to the higher intelligence which likely commits fewer penalties which can be an issue in road games.
I hope that someone found this study beneficial. As my first ever use of the sim, this study was very time consuming relative to the word-count payout I will receive for this media. However, in my opinion, it has put to rest this issue of archetype and has eased my mind that I am not harming my team's chance for success by staying a zone cornerback.