-
Registration is disabled due to constant spammers. Email [email protected] and we will temporarily re-enable registration for you.
2080 DRAFT EXTRAVAGANZA!
- Thread starter Travis7401
- Start date
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
I believe there is a setting for how often young guys will get a random bump to their potential ratings.
Yes but you don’t need a stopper. You kind of need SP.
That's fine, but that's the type of player I take in the 5th round, not the 1st round. I've drafted 50 of those guys and only 1 or 2 actually popped! With a 1st round pick I'm looking for a 50/50 chance!
I mean your scout loves him for some reason... I typically only believe my scout if the player has stats to back it up. His hitting stats are so bad in college that I would just assume my scout is dumb.
In general I've found OSA to be more accurate than the scouts, even when I put a lot of $ into the scouts. I use my scout as the 2nd opinion to break ties between players.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
I think they are the benchmark. Just that if I am programming a game, and putting in non-linear progression, it's a fun feature to have sleepers, and even more fun if only a few scouts see them. Not that the stats don't count for more in most cases as the general rule.
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
Also, there's no need for a high-leverage pitcher if your team has no high-leverage situations because your starter got knocked out in the 4th.
As an example, I took a guy in round 5 lat year that my scout LOVED (ie 5-10 higher potential in every bat rating).... but his college stats weren't all that great so I didn't take him earlier. If I was only using my scout, he would have been the 2nd or 3rd best LF in the draft, but I'm not going to take him in the 1st, 2nd or 3rd rounds when there are still 50/50 bets available.
Getting him in the 5th round is a good deal, but I wouldn't have been sad if someone else took him earlier. He hit the shit out of the ball in A this season and did great when I moved him to AA in the 2nd half of the year! He's motivated by his ANGER!
http://utopia.allsimbaseball9.com/game/lgreports/players/player_3679.html
Getting him in the 5th round is a good deal, but I wouldn't have been sad if someone else took him earlier. He hit the shit out of the ball in A this season and did great when I moved him to AA in the 2nd half of the year! He's motivated by his ANGER!
http://utopia.allsimbaseball9.com/game/lgreports/players/player_3679.html
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
He was 12th on my scout's big board and only one of a few players with those kind of potential ratings. Either the game is fucking with me or it's fucking with you. It must be doing one or the other; either it's a random scouting bump for players to slip up on, or he's a genuine sleeper.
I'm interested to see how he pans out, because I have a massive scouting budget, and this seems like the type of prize they would put in for that.
I see what you mean about lesser players but he was just too fucking tempting.
Our scouts are all excellent and budgets likely in the same ballpark. I think it’s just random.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
So there's no point in having a large amateur scouting budget? You guys have been playing the game for so long y'all probably right, but I just assumed my scouting budget was large and therefore I'd been given access to information that those with low budgets hadn't. It's not a wildly silly assumption.
Is there any point to having a scouting budget at all if you can just go OSA and stats?
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
Mine's legendary on amateurs, and I have 8m on them alone with the overall budget at 12m. I assumed a lot of people would have the league minimum in order to invest elsewhere (I've seen people write that they've turned them right down), so with that the budgets for amateur scouts would be pretty different.
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
Yes, because sometimes OSA is wrong about guys but your scout may be right. I think all anyone is saying is not to rely on scouting alone. Take stats into account as well.
Also, yes, some guys just randomly put it together and get major increases in ratings:
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
But stats and OSA would give you an x and y axis, so there's not really much point in having a third if what you're saying is true.
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
OSA is not infallible
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
But then you can plot that against stats for every player, and it will show up any wild discrepancies. No need for a third opinion, as it doesn't add much. It'll only agree with one or the other.
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
Then cut your budget.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
I'm still on the fence. I don't think they have amateur scouting for no reason. I'm just illustrating the pointlessness of a third wheel if what you say is true.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
OSA isn’t very good. I disagree with Travis on that one.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
Ah. @Karl Hungus - I don't read that setting as "how often do you want players will get a random bump. I read it as "how random do you want the talent progression to be".
I guess there is no real proof is what I’m trying to say. It’s all in your philosophy and what you find fun. I think I’ve had a $12m scouting budget most the time and random years where I made it $0. I’m not sure I noticed that much. I think my scout is better at telling me the busts than the gems. Or when a player is starting to fall off because of age.
Not really. I’m sure you’ll find players with bad stats that develop. I’ve always thought HS stats mean pretty much nothing since the players are so young. College stats are just a nice guy check, but I’m not sure I’d not pick a player because of stats.
Overall I think having 3, actually 4 with the draft website, checkpoints is a good thing. If you set your budget to $0 I’m not sure what the consequence would be as your scout is still good.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
This sort of reinforces my belief that there are gems to be found, as now you say it, I've had a couple of busts which OSA didn't pick up and have seen the mechanic at work. I'm sure the developers would program it both ways, but busts are obviously always going to be in greater numbers for realism.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
I do think there is a point to having a 3rd checkpoint, as I think there is more to the mechanic and the scot will spot gems and busts. It's Travis and Karl that don't believe that to be true, and the game is programmed randomly in regards to whether a player will suddenly develop or bust.
I have the perfect example in David Ray. I picked him up last year in the late rounds because his OSA ratings and HS stats were off the charts. My scout said he was shit. I didn't listen. He's shit.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
His overall potential has drastically dropped, and my scout still thinks he's rubbish. OSA has him a bit better, but has gone from thinking he's 3 stars to 1.5.
They don’t? Pretty sure it’s both. If your scout has a player as good and they are good, it’s not really a random talent increase. That was probably just their true talent.
Karl Hungus
Here to fix the cable
A lot of the guys who come out of nowhere (the random changes) go from being garbage to being good. It's their way of getting the real-life dynamic of late round guys that develop late and make the majors. There's no way to scout for that ahead of time.
When Lisbon drafted Byung-soo Kim in 2072 (8th round!!!) he had potential ratings of 50 each for contact, power, & eye.
2077: 55/65/65
2078: 65/75/75
2079: 65/80/75
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
Players surely must have their potential programmed in the from the start, no matter how randomly it reveals itself? I thought ur random switch that you showed me just simply tweaked how randomly you wanted those true potentials to reveal?
Surely Cairos (and all other gems), are examples of players that have been stuck on the unfavourable side of the random development dynamic, and therefore it's even more likely that scouts who are on high budgets are more likely to reveal that fact and their true potential. It would, as I say make it quite likely that those players will come good.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
I think @hayvis is overreacting to SSS here, but I do put a bunch of money in amateur scouting and do think sometimes my scout has a better read on someone than OSA.
BUT, this is complicated by people openly sharing scouting rankings or chattering about players (BANT) -- if OSA is way off, multiple scouts are going to get it right, and you'll probably hear about it or they'll just be gone before ur up. There's also the additional scouting rankings on the draft website. I'm not sure we ever figured out where those come from.
So with OSA, Draft Website, forum chatter, and whatever Travis is producing, it's harder to picture a ton of diamonds in the rough.
BUT, this is complicated by people openly sharing scouting rankings or chattering about players (BANT) -- if OSA is way off, multiple scouts are going to get it right, and you'll probably hear about it or they'll just be gone before ur up. There's also the additional scouting rankings on the draft website. I'm not sure we ever figured out where those come from.
So with OSA, Draft Website, forum chatter, and whatever Travis is producing, it's harder to picture a ton of diamonds in the rough.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
https://manuals.ootpdevelopments.com/index.php?man=ootp19&page=player_development
Chance
Chance also plays a hand in rating changes. Sometimes, the light bulb inside a player's head will just go on, and he will jump to a new level of play. Players can experience significant changes in their ratings and potential in a short time. Of course, the same is true in reverse. Some players will never live up to their potential.
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
Yes. This is backing up what I am saying. The development has a degree of randomness, Karl showed the setting slider. But the true potential of the player is not random. It's going to be set in stone, and the time point at which he reaches it will be different (or he might never reach it). But scouts will sometimes give you a clue as to what that true potential is. In fact I think that's the only real clue we get.
Cairos may well turn out to be a gem, but the fact that OSA had him so low means you probably could have gotten him in the 3rd instead of the 1st that's all I'm saying!
Here's how I evaluate players:
1. OSA Potential - I find OSA to be slightly more reliable than my scout, who hates everyone, and this is publicly available information which will largely determine demand.
2. Scout potential - I use the scout to break ties among similar players, going with the guy who my scout has rated as good as OSA or better. Once I'm down into the 3rd-5th rounds I sometimes get a guy OSA says sucks but my scout loves. Maybe my scout is right, maybe he is wrong.
3. Current Ratings/Development/Stats - I like to see some good player development and stats showing that the guy is actually getting better and has a chance to hit his potential. Potential ratings are great, but if the guy is already showing slow/no development that isn't a good sign. This is usually where I break ties between college/HS players with similar potential. I'll take the college guy if he's got good development. College is pretty equivalent to A ball, so if he does great there I know he can start in AA.
4. Intangibles - When you're down into the ALL YELLOW GUYS with 40-45 bat and pitch ratings, you might as well look at intangibles and hope he gets a bump. FWIW, some decent players will fall because of bad intangibles too!
Here's how I evaluate players:
1. OSA Potential - I find OSA to be slightly more reliable than my scout, who hates everyone, and this is publicly available information which will largely determine demand.
2. Scout potential - I use the scout to break ties among similar players, going with the guy who my scout has rated as good as OSA or better. Once I'm down into the 3rd-5th rounds I sometimes get a guy OSA says sucks but my scout loves. Maybe my scout is right, maybe he is wrong.
3. Current Ratings/Development/Stats - I like to see some good player development and stats showing that the guy is actually getting better and has a chance to hit his potential. Potential ratings are great, but if the guy is already showing slow/no development that isn't a good sign. This is usually where I break ties between college/HS players with similar potential. I'll take the college guy if he's got good development. College is pretty equivalent to A ball, so if he does great there I know he can start in AA.
4. Intangibles - When you're down into the ALL YELLOW GUYS with 40-45 bat and pitch ratings, you might as well look at intangibles and hope he gets a bump. FWIW, some decent players will fall because of bad intangibles too!
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
This is kind of beside the point though. What I'm saying is that although the development progression can be random, the potential of the player must be programmed from the start, and therefore scouts are there to reveal (or not) those unseen numbers. Therefore if they see something wildly different to the other two metrics, then it's probably true, but the player may not get there because he's already so borked by being on the bad side of the random development.
I think you're just seeing it from the sporting side of things, and I'm trying to find a glitch in the game.
I also put $7 or $8M into amateur scouting and my scout and he says Cairo is:
Potential Bat
45/60/45/35/60
CF = 70
So... one of our scouts is incorrect about his potential!
Potential Bat
45/60/45/35/60
CF = 70
So... one of our scouts is incorrect about his potential!
hayvis
Will-Gnome Member
Which is what makes the game fun, obviously. The fact that my scout seems to be on a lonely island actually gives me more hope, because I can't see the point of him being wrong. It just feels like the game decided to randomly give only me a peek at his true potential.
The way you see it is the game decided to generate some fucking horribly out of whack numbers to slip me up. I like my way of seeing it, as I think a video game is more likely to give a high odds jackpot to someone than a turd sandwich.
So here is why I think Campbell is a great 1st round pick... (better than a couple of the picks before him!)
1. OSA has him highly rated GREENS AND BLUES POTENTIAL
2. Your Scout presumably agrees
3. His current ratings and statistics are great, which means he has almost no potential to be a bust (other than an injury)
4. Intangibles - not good but not the worst, this is basically a tie breaker when players are equal and nobody is his equal.
Here is why LIBERACE isn't a great 1st round pick IMO (at least not when there were several other players who looked good on the board)
1. OSA's potential makes him a AAA guy who probably won't even be useful as a 4th OF in the WBL. He either needs better range or 50 contact. There are still several players with much higher OSA potential on the board at this point, and you can't really afford to take a LOTTERY PICK shot as a rebuilding team.
2. Your scout thinks his potential is much higher, so this is a bonus!
3. His stats and current progression are really bad. His best season ever was as a Freshman in HS and he has actually regressed since then. His current ratings have improved through the years, but his stats don't match. He's hitting significantly below average in college.
4. Average personality, nothing to add or subract.
1. OSA has him highly rated GREENS AND BLUES POTENTIAL
2. Your Scout presumably agrees
3. His current ratings and statistics are great, which means he has almost no potential to be a bust (other than an injury)
4. Intangibles - not good but not the worst, this is basically a tie breaker when players are equal and nobody is his equal.
Here is why LIBERACE isn't a great 1st round pick IMO (at least not when there were several other players who looked good on the board)
1. OSA's potential makes him a AAA guy who probably won't even be useful as a 4th OF in the WBL. He either needs better range or 50 contact. There are still several players with much higher OSA potential on the board at this point, and you can't really afford to take a LOTTERY PICK shot as a rebuilding team.
2. Your scout thinks his potential is much higher, so this is a bonus!
3. His stats and current progression are really bad. His best season ever was as a Freshman in HS and he has actually regressed since then. His current ratings have improved through the years, but his stats don't match. He's hitting significantly below average in college.
4. Average personality, nothing to add or subract.
Here's why I think Joseph Nelson is a good pick (and I'm glad you got him)
1. With OSA potential he'd be good platoon bat in the WBL for you, so he should make the WBL. He's not going to be a good defensive player but he won't be a liability in LF. Is tall enough that he might be able to play 1B despite his error rating. In short, he could make the WBL as a LF/RF/1B Backup bench bat or a platoon starter in LF.
2. Your scout must like him as well or better.
3. He hit the piss out of the ball in college and is already pretty far along in development! He should be able to contribute in 2 seasons.
4. Intangibles neither add or subtract from him
1. With OSA potential he'd be good platoon bat in the WBL for you, so he should make the WBL. He's not going to be a good defensive player but he won't be a liability in LF. Is tall enough that he might be able to play 1B despite his error rating. In short, he could make the WBL as a LF/RF/1B Backup bench bat or a platoon starter in LF.
2. Your scout must like him as well or better.
3. He hit the piss out of the ball in college and is already pretty far along in development! He should be able to contribute in 2 seasons.
4. Intangibles neither add or subtract from him
Rutgers Mike
Dr. Sad
So far the DRAFT STEALS awards go to @Mr. Radpants for getting KUNG FU where he did, @Soonerfan09 for getting DURABLE KEN FLYNN at his spot, and @Yankee151 for getting Figueroa in the 2nd.
I was torn between Moreno, Ken Flynn, and Figueroa at my pick.
I was torn between Moreno, Ken Flynn, and Figueroa at my pick.
TonyGin&Juice
Sucking off Lawn Guy Land hobos.
@Mr. Radpants
You fools letting RICH "AINT NO BITCH" LEWIS fall to me in the second round? Lawd what a steal. Niek Ploeg hates him too which makes it an even better pick to me to me.
You fools letting RICH "AINT NO BITCH" LEWIS fall to me in the second round? Lawd what a steal. Niek Ploeg hates him too which makes it an even better pick to me to me.
I think @Schauwn kinda blew it with his double top 5 picks. Burton is a decent SP prospect and a decent OF prospect but he's not CANT MISS at either. With some CANT MISS guys on the board, I expect more from the 1-1 when you are a rebuilding team. A fun player, for sure! TORKEL is fine, but is getting a barely a corner OF with a top 5 pick where you want to be when Jesus comes back?
Part of this is the fact that there were a lot of decent players in the 1st round, but no true SUPERSTAR.... but with two top 5 picks I expect more! To me he coulda had Jack Miller and Campbell!
Part of this is the fact that there were a lot of decent players in the 1st round, but no true SUPERSTAR.... but with two top 5 picks I expect more! To me he coulda had Jack Miller and Campbell!
TonyGin&Juice
Sucking off Lawn Guy Land hobos.
You da one out here talking about "not even a DH" Kung Fu being a steal. Get for real.
Damn, he was next on ma'shortlist.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
You guys took everyone on my list. This is going to take hours now.
I actually forgot to mention Tony's pick as the best pick in the 1st round. He got hisself an actual bat at a defensive position and a guy with HIGH LOYALTY! Like Yankee said, you can sign him for one of your patented 10 year contracts, but he'll only be $3M!
TonyGin&Juice
Sucking off Lawn Guy Land hobos.
I actually had him at the top of my BIG BOARD list but never activated it. Happy with the SS I got in the first but really happy with getting this guy in the second. Glad I actually have money to sign these guys no matter what their demand too.
Mr. Radpants
Trog Five Standing By
The thing that hurt about Kung Fuuuuu is that there were so many good fielders and pitchers in this draft, so coming out with a frog bat this year does seem like a misstep.
Tony's SUB MENDOZA MIF CREATURES are put on notice!
TonyGin&Juice
Sucking off Lawn Guy Land hobos.
If I wasn't burned out on drafting BAT FIRST guys with absolutely no defense or range but tons of speed I would have taken him over Fajita but I just can't handle the no defense anymore.