Consensus is that Ball Hawk is a must have for all WRs. Can anyone add or take away from this statement?
Thunder66
offline
offline
Greater emphasis on Catching means more need for a bonus to Speed/Agility/Vision [which is what ball hawk provides]????
Not sure how that makes sense.
I'm not arguing that ball hawk is or is not a useful VA, but what does it have to do with meeting the increased need for catching?
If you have low catching you'd be better off going with Mr Reliable, Sure Hands, and Possession Rec.
Now I have Ball Hawk on my Possession WR as he doesn't need the other stuff (he does have Sure Hands) as he has good Catching/Jumping/Vision/Strength so a boost to speed/agility to get into position and not get beat out by a speedy CB comes in handy. But the last thing a speed WR needs to help him catch is a bonus to speed.
But I'm using logic and common sense, so I'm probably wrong.
Not sure how that makes sense.
I'm not arguing that ball hawk is or is not a useful VA, but what does it have to do with meeting the increased need for catching?
If you have low catching you'd be better off going with Mr Reliable, Sure Hands, and Possession Rec.
Now I have Ball Hawk on my Possession WR as he doesn't need the other stuff (he does have Sure Hands) as he has good Catching/Jumping/Vision/Strength so a boost to speed/agility to get into position and not get beat out by a speedy CB comes in handy. But the last thing a speed WR needs to help him catch is a bonus to speed.
But I'm using logic and common sense, so I'm probably wrong.
RunOverYou
offline
offline
Thunder66... do you know if the QB takes into account the effects of VAs that increase a receiver's catching (like the three you named) when he makes his calculations about how likely a receiver is to catch his pass? Or does the QB make that determination based only on the receiver's "natural" catching?
Thunder66
offline
offline
Originally posted by RunOverYou
Thunder66... do you know if the QB takes into account the effects of VAs that increase a receiver's catching (like the three you named) when he makes his calculations about how likely a receiver is to catch his pass? Or does the QB make that determination based only on the receiver's "natural" catching?
I'm not sure of the exact mechanics of it tbh, you'd have to ask Catch/Bort in the QA.
I have my assumptions, but I'm not 100% sure that those are right so I don't want to give you inaccurate information.
Thunder66... do you know if the QB takes into account the effects of VAs that increase a receiver's catching (like the three you named) when he makes his calculations about how likely a receiver is to catch his pass? Or does the QB make that determination based only on the receiver's "natural" catching?
I'm not sure of the exact mechanics of it tbh, you'd have to ask Catch/Bort in the QA.
I have my assumptions, but I'm not 100% sure that those are right so I don't want to give you inaccurate information.
ReMeDy
offline
offline
As an OC, I personally hate Ball Hawk, especially for lvl 60'ish teams because QB's throw faster bullets, so there is less time for the VA to stay active. You could argue it's beneficial on lobs deep down field, but with the recent Bort updates further penalizing deep passes, the sim has evolved a bit from the passing game, adding emphasis to runs and short passes.
Even if it's a decent VA, I still wouldn't pick it because there's too many better things for WR's to choose including but not limited to Poss Receiver, Mr. Reliable, Sure Hands, Clutch, and brTk VA's.
Even if it's a decent VA, I still wouldn't pick it because there's too many better things for WR's to choose including but not limited to Poss Receiver, Mr. Reliable, Sure Hands, Clutch, and brTk VA's.
Edited by ReMeDy on Apr 8, 2010 17:36:13
Edited by ReMeDy on Apr 8, 2010 17:35:58
direfire
offline
offline
I am a first time WR builder so I have no clue but I would imagine ball hawk would rock if you're running a lot of hook routes.
lockdownneon
offline
offline
if you run long routes a lot im sure it's cant hurt. But, that all depends on your team.
ericb45696
offline
offline
I'm pretty sure the "consensus" amongst WRs was that ball hawk was not a very good choice of VA for WRs compared to better VAs available.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.






























