I'm under the impression that Intelligence helps with play knowledge, which improves how well the perform during that play. Even when Seth's numbers were the standard, I would bump up my intelligence weights for that reason.

Yes, my understanding is that intelligence helps determine how fast your player learns the playbook and play knowledge is a factor is how effective a certain defensive play is. One of the reasons I keep some long time players, even though they don't have good skills anymore, is because of institutional knowledge. They know the playbook inside and out from being around so long. Also, signing veteran free agents - because playbooks are similar across the league, a lot of them have the institutional knowledge even though they haven't played for you. It's a balance vs. speed/skills. Obviously, if you have the speed/skills, your play knowledge isn't as big a deal.

Does anybody have an opinion on expiration dates for defensive linemen? I know lots of owners are ok with 33 year offensive linemen if their blocking skills are still good enough, but I didn't know if there were similar ideas about when a d lineman's skills or attributes were no longer viable. Just curious.

Lately I feel like people tell me, and I see, d lineman being used up to year 12 and sometimes 13. In XFL I'm rolling the dice in a couple DEs making it through yr 13 before crashing.

Edit: I would rather pay a young good DE big money for a long time than rely on FA vets. I would potentially trade for a good vet if the price was right.

I agree about trading for them - d linemen seem like a total gamble in the draft and can bust a lot. I'm just trying to figure out if there's a floor for speed/strength/acceleration or pass rush/run defense that would make a guy more useful than you'd think he'd be even if he's 33-34 years old - like would a 100 pass rush/run defense guy with only 63 strength still be any good?

I don't have numbers for you... but I believe (with zero evidentiary support) that old "legends" are worth keeping around. I signed Michael Cherrito, which is way past his prime in terms of physical ability, but he's an absolute legend, #2 in sacks and #1 in hurries all time... so I signed him as a veteran presence off the bench just for that reason. He's a backup so I can't comment easily on his actual performance, but I'm all about having the ring chasing legends! One of my DBs, Leslie Smith, is also an "old man" but as a probably future hall of famer, I bring him in for some veteran gravitas.

It's one of my personal quirks - we were chatting in the chat about my "system" of success, and as I said, there is none. But one of the things I try to do (for fun) is manage things like a "real" team, as much as possible, which is why the ring chasing veterans is something I do. And I believe, in my own head, that it makes a difference! That there must be something coded into these special players that makes them good. Like there must be some secret coding we can't see that makes Allen Reynoso get so many INTs. Like I would sign that guy at any age because he's an absolute legend. Or maybe I'm wasting roster spots on washed up old guys?

I have 13 double digit year veterans. Rapid Valley has 8. Arkansas 9. Brooklyn 7. We will see if the young legs of Rapid Valley and Brooklyn win over the older hands in LA and Arkansas.

I have wondered if there's a "sell by" date coded into the players. I'm just trying to figure out if I should scrap my "he's over 30, he's going to ****" mindstate and see if there are certain skills (like ball carry or run defense for example) that might have a pretty long shelf life even if the physical skills appear to be declining. It does seem like the RBs or WRs are the ones most likely to have the huge -8 ratings drops at age 30, but maybe defenders can still be useful longer. I'm certainly not going to argue with your roster building savvy as you head towards another possible Super Bowl appearance.

I don't know the actual numbers, but my guess is that this relates to the statements Norm and I made in the comments just previous to this one.

It's a balance between skills ratings and play knowledge. It's hard to judge play knowledge in any easy way, so most owners just avoid it. Some real deals my be available, if you have the time to spend on it.

I've also held the belief for a long time now, that players have "hidden attributes", which affect their play. One example I had in another league was a 7th rd pick RB, default 68/69 (71/72 by my weights), who averaged 5 yards/carry over 3 seasons, and had multiple KRs and PRs for TDs.

I’d say there’s an element of luck and hidden skill as well. Norm mentioned Michael Cherrito who was a 5th round pick and didn’t even start for multiple seasons because Max Dicken (another HoF player) was on RDE. If Dicken would have never spent half a season injured, I might never had seen his true potential.

When I let Dicken walk, I knew Cherrito had the skills to start; otherwise, I might have tried to draft a young high round rookie DE to take over for Dicken and Cherrito might have played from the bench because of his draft / player rankings. The same allowed me to let Cherrito walk because Ronald Surface (averaging 17 sacks per year since taking the starting role) was a plug and play much like Cherrito.

To answer the other question, I roll with those older D-Linemen for sure. They’re good until age 33-34. A lot of people drop them at age 29 like they’re a WR or RB. This is a mistake in my book.

Tying in a little bit to both your response and billstein's, do you use overrides for d linemen in certain formations, or just wherever they are in the depth chart? I usually look at a player's general intelligence, not connected to specific plays. I'm assuming a DE (or LB) with mediocre intelligence or pass rushing but who has 100% familiarity with a specific play might excel anyway.

I've resisted doing much with overrides besides special teams until now, but I guess that's going to be necessary. I've been guilty of "nobody older than 29" but that's a habit I'm going to have to break too.