Quote:
Originally Posted by Crickett13
so no response to the fact that 85% of players in a draft class are now ranked between 1.5 and 2.5 stars potential and another 10% lower than that meaning only 5% of players are even slightly above average?
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crickett13
Which I wouldn't argue with if there were 30 players with potential of 3 stars or better but it re evaluated on an obviously different basis. We are talking about the exact same players involved where suddenly we went from just over 10% of the draft having above average "potential" to less than 5%
|
I read your post as bolded, 5% slightly above average. 5% of a 600 player draft is 30 players. Lucas' post notes 30 players in his post I quoted..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lukas Berger
I mean, this is what real drafts look like. There aren't typically more than 30 future above average MLB players in a given draft (and that's probably high).
|
I'm not saying it can't be tweaked, v25 just came out and with all of the changes I'd probably be more surprised if fine tuning wasn't needed. I just don't want to over correct, as we did in the past, to placate some that wanted change because "realistic" wasn't "fun". Add in many of those asking for the "fun" change continued to say the 5% was unrealistic anyway.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crickett13
I think there is a lot of great stuff and I don't disagree with the change in the ratings formula and think it will be a very positive change. The stars are a minor issue that I have but it does mean having to spend significantly more time doing things like evaluating draft classes and trades which means I am less likely to do those things.
I am in the minority since I don't play the game to replicate history and only play fictional leagues so sometimes other users dismiss my concerns out of hand. Fortunately, the development team does not.
|
To the first bold point: That is the exact argument the "draft is not fun" posters used that wanted it changed. IE it takes too long to separate players when the next 50 guys are all 30/80 or 1.5 stars. Their solution was to pump up player ratings, giving a wider range of Ov/Pot, to make sorting easier and fun. But those ratings were artificially high meaning players are more likely to crash, less likely to develop. Now comes the complaints.. "why did my 3.5 star player I just drafted crash to 1.5 stars 3 months later?".
If they can tweak the pool without artificially pumping up ratings, or if the pool is short of realistic numbers and they tweak that? I'm all for it.
To the second bold point: I hope you don't think I am dismissing your concerns. I'm not and I hope they see something in your files that can fix the issue without going down the road we already traveled. Nothing more than that. I'd also add that I have not seen your file, you may well be right and things are not as they should be.
My only concern is that we don't end up going away from reality for something more "fun" as we did in the past.