Quote:
Originally Posted by NomarHits400
Point taken- and to each his own- but I have a few points/questions.
First, you are absolutely incorrect that my settings create "players who come from the feeders are MUCH too good and ready to step right from their HS/college league into the majors". You're not paying attention.
These settings don't just "work for me". They work; meaning, if you say that you have set them up this way- then you did not do so correctly. As I said- take five minutes to look at the roster and you will see for yourself. Alot of these players are in the single digits on a 1-100 scale upon creation. An even larger percentage are <20. You can't get much more raw than that.
You say "I'm far more focused on player development, as in, developing raw talent with lots of potential for growth, versus taking fully grown kids and inserting them into my lineup with little to no seasoning."....My response- I agree 100%, and that's exactly what my settings provide. The players coming out of high school are extremely raw- some with high potential. Most will take at least 3-6 years to develop fully.
Your point about not wanting to deal with the "waiver wire fodder" (my term- your's was "granular kids") is moot, since- correct me if I am wrong, these are feeder leagues. Meaning, that these players will supply a draft with X number of rounds. The "Crappy kids" will never see the light of day in any case. In YOUR utopia, MOST players will have 5 star potential (which renders a draft pointless IMHO, but it's your game). You'll just weed out the 3 and 4 star potentials, while I will weed out 0's, 1's and 2's. It's all relative.
I understand the concept of what you are trying to achieve- and I think it's cool- but I disagree that feeder leagues is the way to go about doing this is all.
|
I appreciate the work you did on your file. That's great. You don't have to agree with my settings, but they work quite well for me and so, I'm just going to stick with them and decided to share them with the community at large.
Thanks for your feedback.