Quote:
Originally Posted by The Game
I disagree with this. I have tested scouting on 11 & 12, where i was maxed out for scouting bugdet and had a legendary scout. He still misfired on several prospects. For most of my leagues i am just happy to have 2-3 guys make it the the ML from each draft class of 25. Out of ev3ery 3 classes i hope to have 1 guy who plays for 10+ yrs. In my current league I use 100% scouting accuracy except when I draft. i usee 100% because i have so many custom players coming in each yr i want to make sure that they are performing as their ratings show. I am much happy with it at 100% for that league. I also think people place to much emphasis on scouting in a league with 3+ levels of minors. This is baseball not football, not every #1 draft pick is Peyton Manning or Stephen Strasburg. Gotta have a few Sam Bowie's in there.
|
Well you have to be smart about the ratings too. Of course not every 5 star guy will become great. But in my experience, if I have a great scout with large scouting budget and I find a guy with very high potential from both my scout and the OSA, he almost always ends up being a top prospect and likely a very good major league player. Usually you won't find a guy like that after the first 5 rounds of a draft though. However, in my experience (a 7 year franchise) I ALWAYS get at least one great player in a draft. By that I mean he is immediately ranked in the top 100 prospects (sometimes even a top 20 prospect) after signing him and usually develops into a major league all-star. By the 7th year of my franchise, I had 2 all-star pitchers, 1 MVP left fielder, and 1 all-star first baseman who were all drafted by me. And I had many other draft picks who were looking like they were going to develop into good major-leaguers when they got older. In my experience, it has been a little too easy to find great players in the 1st and 2nd rounds. I never really had any busts.
If you see a guy in the 13th round with high potential, very low current ratings, and terrible OSA ratings then, true, he probably won't turn out well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EvilGenius
While the frustrations of scouting accuracy will always be a part of the OOTP forums, this thread does open an intriguing question .... what kind of budget should be allocated to scouting? How much of an advantage do you actually gain by dumping boatloads of money into scouting?
When I first started playing, I maxed out the scouting budget. I played with teams that had money, and I spent it and built winners. My scouts were rated at Legendary in most categories.
The better I got at the game, I now challenge myself to win under more difficult circumstances. Now I play such small market teams, I hardly have any money at all to put into scouting. And I still manage to build winners.
My experience is that it hasn't made any noticeable difference (based on zero data, just a feeling). But then again, I'm better at the game now, on top of which I pay way more attention to stats than to scouting. Maybe that's why I haven't noticed the difference.
What kind of budgets are other people using? How much is going into scouting? Is it making a difference?
|
It's hard to quantify how big of an advantage money gives you in scouting, but it's not that expensive to maximize the budget. I think the max is like $8 million and in my experience with max budget, scouting is very accurate if you look at OSA ratings in addition to your scout's ratings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumber-n-Lightning
I've got another question regarding scouting: what is to be made of conflicting info?
When I play a fictional league the info I get during, and immediately after, the inaugural draft is often confusing. To whit:
Overall current/potential ratings on the main profile page and scouting report page often varying a lot - aren't both ratings from the same scouting department?
Players with good individual ratings but low overall ratings, or vice versa.
A scouting assessment the exact opposite of the ratings - players with decent ratings across the board listed as "Minor league filler at best," or those with crap ratings getting a "Can't miss prospect" label.
AI managers burying well-rated, well regarded players deep down the depth chart and starting players that appear to be hopelessly bad.
Without any stats to go on at first, you're at the mercy of the ratings. I've tossed quite a few of fictional starts because I didn't have the patience to try and figure out through play which of the huge gaggle of garbage ratings that replaced the initially promising ones immediately following the draft were or were not accurate.
What do most folk do in fictional leagues, pump up the scouting accuracy for the inaugural draft?
|
1. I honestly don't know the purpose of getting scouting reports of players individually. I wouldn't worry about it too much.
2. What do you mean individual ratings?
3. I haven't observed this in any of my leagues. Usually if a player has high potential and I send a scouting trip, they will just repeat that he is great. Like I said, though, I wouldn't put too much value in scouting trips.
4. Which is why you should control your team's lineups
. If you are talking about opposing AI managers, maybe they have different scout ratings than you do.