Monday, November 29, 2010

Defensive Player Building: Are You Building to Attack?

One of the most frustrating things for an agent is to have a player that does not perform as they feel he should.  You feel that you have done everything right, the attributes are there, the SAs are there, and yet they are still twiddling their thumbs on the stat sheet.  It is frustrating, and often yields equipment changes, conversion to a STOP, or a nice trip to the glue factory.

There is generally one rule of thumb for making a dominant player:
  • The dot has to be able to win the interactions he is being built for.
I am going to focus in a defensive perspective for this post, but the same principle applies in an offensive mindset as well.  I cannot build an OT with tremendous agility/speed (mobility) if in the hold block/break block interaction I am just going to lose time and time again.  The build might look nice with 74 speed and 100 agility, but I need the strength and blocking to consistently win the interaction.

Back to this post's original intention.  I am going to address a couple builds that just are not worth your time...and yet they are consistently attempted.

The Fumble Forcing MLB

Example Build
Let me preface that I am not ignoring the above build's value for special teams force fumble ability.  What we are focusing on here is why the above build will not force significant fumbles on defense, outside of some AA or AAA league play.  So, why doesn't a build like the above work?  We've got strength, +% force fumble, Monster Hit, and decent momentum via 107 speed/~83 agility. 

It's not me, it's you.

Not being able to force fumbles with this build is a product of his opposition's build.  In today's sim, ball carriers with 68 and below carrying are few and far between.  Whether it is an elusive spin back or a big power back, most have all caught on that carrying is vital.  We now see elusives with 81 carrying instead of 60.  So it comes down to your fumbles being more RNG than anything.  Ball carriers 'not fumble' scores are just consistently too high.  With the need for 100 to 120 speed to even play on the same field as the offensive side of the ball, it just is not possible to get force fumble scores high enough to get desired results on a regular basis.

The Strength LDE

Example Build
Again I have to preface that this build does have some value as an anti-pancake/brick wall on the strong side.  What we are targeting here is the lack of pass rushing (sacks and hurries) that seems to come from a build with such tremendous break block/revcake ability.  Close to 140 strength, high shed block, and stacked +% break block should be pretty good, right?

It's not me, it's you.

Once again the opposition is the issue.  Almost all RTs in GLB right now are strength loaded.  At the World League level we are looking at RTs with 135 to 145 strength.  Of course a strength LDE is not going to just be able to plow through a build like that.  The strength loaded RTs are the perfect counter to a strength LDE.





The point being made here is that you always need to consider your opposition.  You should be building to attack a common weakness amongst your opponents.

Want a LB that can force fumbles?  Build a blitzing LB with good strength (80+) and +% force fumble AEQ.  Why?  Because the QB is your most vulnerable target with his almost guaranteed low carrying.

Want a strength DE that can record sacks and hurries on the stat sheet?  Place him at RDE, where he will likely face a LT geared with less strength and more blocking/agility.

Do not just build a player that you think will be great.  Build a player that you know will be great.

4 comments:

  1. I disagree. Stat whoring isn't the point, and I would love it if more ends were built to not get pancaked. I would rather see 2 hurries and 0 pancakes on my stat sheet than 3 sacks 5 hurries and 10 pancakes. That means that my DE isn't holding on v the run and that teams are getting to the second level. My DE holds the line so that my speedy LB can hit the HB or the QB.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The 2nd post about stat whoring not being the point doesn't get the point. This was talking about Strength based DEs..... They are not going to get pancaked so, STFU and thank Mat for giving you a place to show your ignorance.

    Thanks Mat.

    ReplyDelete