![[DEV] ISFL Forums](http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/images/emerald/logo.png "[DEV] ISFL Forums"){kind=logo}
+- [DEV] ISFL Forums (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums)
+-- Forum: Community (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=5)
+--- Forum: Media (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=37)
+---- Forum: Graded Articles (http://dev.sim-football.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=38)
+---- Thread: *Supply and Demand in the ISFL (/showthread.php?tid=34019)
*Supply and Demand in the ISFL - SwankyPants31 - 07-30-2021
Hey all, I was curious about how many active players at each position there currently are in the league compared to how many “ideally” there would be if each team had active players at every position, so I threw together a little spreadsheet to get an idea. Before I kick things off, I just want to give a little peek behind the curtain so everyone understands my methodology here, since it’s by no means perfect. Basically, what I did was pull up a list of all players that were both a) over 250 TPE as of the July 24 update, and b) had updated at either the July 24 OR July 17 update. This includes players in the DSFL that fit both criteria and means that ALL players that have earned more than 250 TPE and updated recently are included, not only max earners. I specifically left out the July 10 update since that would include inactive players that were regressed by their GMs, and I didn’t feel like manually going through and weeding those out. The reason behind using the DSFL cap of 250 TPE was because I was curious about ISFL caliber players. Obviously the TPE you can start to be effective at varies by position (with QB being the most obvious example), but I figured it was rare enough that a player gets called up below 250 TPE that it would fit what I was aiming for well enough. Like I mentioned earlier, it’s not a perfect methodology. There’s going to be some skewing due to things like DSFL players hitting the 250 TPE cap and continuing to earn but not update that drives the numbers down a bit, but I feel like the two week window will for the most part capture what I’m looking for. This also means naturally that the S31 class and some of the S30 class aren’t going to be included in these numbers (sorry guys). Without further ado, the chart below shows the numbers I came up with at each position, and I’ll be breaking down each position individually afterwards.
![[Image: unknown.png]](https://media.discordapp.net/attachments/870826491120853012/870827239791546388/unknown.png)
Quarterbacks
Actual: 13 Ideal: 14 Shortage: 1
Probably going to spend the least time on this position because it doesn’t really fit what the count is going for. For reasons that should be obvious to most, I went with 1 QB per team here. Based on the parameters I used, we returned with a shortage of 1, however given that ISFL teams tend to want to secure QBs early and go with trusted users, this is pretty much pointless. The apparent shortage can basically be attributed to old QBs in regression such as Ben Slothlisberger (plz come back bb) and Mike Boss Jr. who are deep in regression and not actively updating as they close out their career, as well as DSFL QBs such as IsHe… ReallyInvisible and Kazimir Oles Jr. who have hit their DSFL caps and are still earning, but likely won’t be updating until they get called up to the ISFL.
Running Backs
Actual: 23 Ideal: 28 Shortage: 5
For the first actual position group being analyzed we have the running backs. I used 2 RBs per team here since it seems very unlikely that a team would prefer to have just 1, however I can see the merit in changing that to 2.5 if the team is looking for a dedicated fullback. Generally however, that second RB fills the role of FB for the most part. Per my research, we have a slight shortage of 5 RBs in the league, however given that the sim seems to (for the most part at least) prefer using a lead back rather than committee, any new RBs would likely have to be content spending some time down in the DSFL or biding their time in a secondary role until they have a chance to take that lead back role.
Tight End
Actual: 14 Ideal: 14 Shortage: None
Next up we have the tight ends. This is the first position group where the actual numbers meet the ideal numbers. I went with just one TE per team, though similar to RB I could see the merit to bumping that up to 1.5. Some teams like to run the 2 TE set, but similar to the FB position a lot of the time this is achieved by lining up the second RB in that spot. Basically what this means is that on paper each active TE over 250 TPE in the league will be able to find a starting spot at TE1 with a team. That said, I’m sure some additional TE’s would be able to find their way on a roster to be used primarily in the TE2/FB spots, but there is honestly limited roster/cap space teams are willing to spend at this position.
Wide Receiver
Actual: 37 Ideal: 42 Shortage: 5
This is a position I struggled with. I ended up deciding to go with 3 WRs per team, but was seriously debating limiting it to just 2.5. As a result, we have a shortage of 5 WRs league wide, meaning there is basically a smattering of WR3 spots throughout the league being taken up by IA players. Given that it’s primarily the top 2 WRs on each team that see most of the love, it’s not exactly surprising that it’s shaken out this way. Coincidentally there’s the same amount of shortage as the RB group, and I’m going to have basically the same analysis here as I did there. If you’re creating a WR now, you can probably expect to find your way on a team, but on the same note don’t necessarily expect to immediately have a marquee role on that team.
Offensive Line
Actual: 23 Ideal: 70 Shortage: 47
Who could have guessed the offensive line would have the largest shortage of players? One interesting thing I noted is that it seems like there’s a growing trend to have inactive players at other positions that got to relatively high TPE to come back just to swap to the offensive line before going inactive again. It makes sense given what we know, inactive or not human players at offensive line are more cost effective than whatever tier bot would match that player, which provides much needed cap relief to teams. It’s understandable that there’s such a low active player count at this position despite having the highest “ideal” count by far at 5 per team due to the fact it’s the least flashy of the positions. That said, active OL are always in demand and anyone at that position should, on paper at least, have their pick of the teams to play for.
Defensive Tackle
Actual: 16 Ideal: 21 Shortage: 5
To start off on the defensive side of the ball we’ll look at tackles. Frankly, I’m a little surprised we don’t have more of a shortage here given that, similar to the offensive line, it's a pretty thankless position that’s hard to really make pop on the stat sheet (unless your name starts with “Big” and ends with “Edd”). I elected to go with 1.5 DTs per team in this case, as I wanted to make the assumption that 3-4 and 4-3 are evenly balanced and thus half the teams run one and half the other. This isn’t necessarily the case mind you, but it gave us a starting point. Defensive tackle is a position right now that likely an active user could find their way on to a team relatively easily. Unlike positions like wide receiver and running back that I covered earlier, the 2nd defensive tackle in a 4-3 defense is likely going to have just as many snaps/opportunities as the top defensive tackle. Of the positions I’ve gone over so far, I’d say this is the first where there is a “real” actual shortage since the others relate mostly to change of pace backs or receivers used only in certain formations.
Defensive End
Actual: 21 Ideal: 28 Shortage: 7
The first of the positions where we have an actual, significant shortage is defensive end. Regardless of what defense you’re running it’s hard to get around playing with 2 ends unless you’re playing a defensive tackle or linebacker out of position. This makes it so that, similar to defensive tackle, an active player could probably find their way into a starting lineup for most teams with relative ease. To be completely honest, it does suffer from the same things defensive tackle does, which makes it generally a quieter position to play and thus less attractive for a lot of people.
Linebacker
Actual: 38 Ideal: 35 Excess: 3
Swinging the opposite direction, linebacker is the first and only position that actually has an excess of players over what would be considered ideal by my calculations. Speaking of which, I feel like the calculation here needs a bit more explanation than some of the other positions. Originally, I had gone with 3.5, as that made sense given my early assumption of equal numbers of 4-3 and 3-4 teams. After some discussion and thinking about it further though, I decided to lower it to 2.5 per team. The reason behind this is the formations where you’re going to have a nickel cornerback. Rather than just have the lowest LB sit on the bench, you’re generally going to see either the corner or safety who plays in the nickel also take up one of the linebacker spots in the base defense. As a result, you really only need 2 linebackers for the 4-3 package and 3 for the 3-4 package. Naturally, I think teams would prefer to have all linebackers at the linebacker spots but given you also have to keep people happy with stats and the like I figured this way would be the most realistic. At any rate, competition for those linebacker spots is stiff at the moment.
Cornerback
Actual: 35 Ideal: 35 Shortage: None
Our second position along with tight end where at least on paper we are right where we want to be. For both corner and safety I assumed 2.5 players per team, since essentially you’ll typically want one of those two positions to play the nickel position and fill in at one of the linebacker spots. Cornerback is similar to linebacker in that on the defensive side of the ball it’s where a lot of players go if they want stats. Especially since the change to the new sim, corners have gotten a whole lot of love and as a result we’ve seen a pretty significant exodus from Safety to Cornerback, which can be illustrated…
Safety
Actual: 24 Ideal: 35 Shortage: 11
Here. By far the largest current shortage in the league. Like I mentioned earlier, I put the same weight on both corner and safety since on paper you would assume an even split of two starters for each plus a flex position of one of the two for the slot position. Clearly that isn’t the case though. Even if you lower safety to just 2 per team, you still end up with a shortage of 4. Going from DDSPF 16 to DDSPF 20 I think it’s pretty safe to say that safeties ended up being the biggest losers, going from absolute stat hogs to struggling sometimes to even show up in the box score. One other thing I’d like to point out though is that the shortage here actually means a slight shortage in corners as well. As I mentioned earlier in this paragraph, lowering the position count to just 2 safeties gets you a deficit of 4, meaning that 7 of the total 11 shortage actually relates more to the nickel position, which can be filled by cornerbacks. Essentially what this means is that by these standards the league has a shortage of 4 pure safeties and 7 of either safety OR corner.
Kicker/Punter
Actual: 11 Ideal: 14 Shortage: 3
Going to give this one a bit of the quarterback treatment since it’s a bit different than the other positions. Yes, technically there is a shortage of 3 active kickers over 250 TPE in the league, however kicker is another position similar to offensive line where someone's activity isn’t really necessary, as a lot of the time you can get away with having an inactive kicker provided they have a decent amount of TPE.
Some Closing Thoughts/TLDR
What probably doesn’t come as a surprise to anyone is that the bulk of the shortages come on the defensive side of the ball. Sure there are a couple -5’s at the receiver and running back positions on offense, but those are mostly for rotational roles whereas the shortages on defense are pretty much entirely made up of starting positions that you’d expect to be on the field for the majority of snaps.
I’m also curious in regards to the chicken vs. egg scenario going on between linebackers and defensive tackles and 3-4 vs 4-3 defenses. The way I set it up with 2.5 linebackers and 1.5 tackles gives us a decent shortage in tackles and a small excess of linebackers, but if you shift it to entirely 3-4 you actually have an excess in defensive tackles and a shortage in linebackers, leading me to believe that, without actually taking the time to go in and check, the defenses are roughly split as I anticipated. What I’m curious about though is whether the defensive formations used are a result of the players available, or if the players available are a result of the defensive formations used by the GMs of the league. Essentially, if there were an excess of players at every position, what defense would be used?
I know expansion talk has died down a bit recently but for me this is the final nail in the coffin. We already have an active shortage at every position except for 3 according to my research. Of those 3, one you could argue I underestimated the amount of players desired, and one should be a shortage due to typically sharing a position on the field with another position (corner and safety at nickel). I don’t necessarily think that an active player at every single position is a reasonable expectation for a team, but adding an additional two more teams worth of players would cause these shortage numbers to look much more worrying. On the other hand, it might mean that any user can play basically any position without having to worry about that position being oversaturated.
I had a lot of fun with this, and to me it was personally interesting getting a snapshot look at positions in the league. Like I mentioned at the beginning, it definitely isn’t a perfect method of gauging activity but in my opinion it does the job decently enough. The “shortages” of players don’t necessarily mean that all these teams have roster holes, just that there are likely some short term options being used at positions that teams would likely prefer to replace with a longer term solution. I’m hoping to do this each season going forward, which should also help us get an idea of growth in the league and how supply vs demand shifts in the league over time. As we’re also expecting to have another Reddit class in the near future, I’m looking forward to seeing how that will affect these numbers.
RE: Supply and Demand in the ISFL - qWest - 07-30-2021
I'd be interested to see how these numbers would look if you removed players in the S23 and earlier classes, as regression is pushing teams to start looking for their replacements.
Definitely fits though that anyone looking to get starting time as quickly as possible is going to have the best chance to do so at OL or Safety.
RE: *Supply and Demand in the ISFL - manicmav36 - 07-31-2021
This is why I was pounding the table against the last two expansion attempts, one of which actually went through. I was incredibly relieved when the last expansion committee decided against it.
While it's true we would've had a glut of players for a few seasons if not for the Berlin/New York expansion, my argument against was that we weren't consistently bringing in enough new creates to support them long-term. So the question becomes, which is more harmful to the league, having players sit for longer than they want, or a possible league contraction? Hopefully we hit a big class here soon, but I'm nervous we're heading towards a contraction in 4 or 5 seasons if recruiting stays the way it is. Is it likely? Hopefully not, but it's something I'm moderately concerned with as of right now.
RE: *Supply and Demand in the ISFL - Memento Mori - 08-01-2021
This is a cool article, and the results are roughly in line with what I expected. The standard path to the ISFL (for most positions) at the moment seems to be (especially with the new sim being much harsher on lower TPE players) that you spend a season in the DSFL to reach ~400 TPE and then are called up to replace the IA/retiring player at your position.