Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt Arnold
It's always interesting to hear the discussions and everyone's impressions. The draft is running a little hot, I would agree, and we'll revisit a little on the player creation going forward to get a little more balance.
I do think our ratings scheme in general pegs players to a higher rating than you would see on like a Fangraphs. I mean, by their scheme, only 10 prospects in baseball are even a 60, which is probably true, but man, it sucks when there's no difference in talent and you just see 500 guys between a 45 and a 55 when making any choices.
But it's not easy, there's a lot of balance to make sure the overall talent levels in the league don't start skewing too low or too high.
|
I'm not sure we're talking about the same thing here. Again, perception v reality. Nobody wants all of the talent to be interchangeable 40-50s. But nor do we want the guideline provided to us by the team or OSA scout in assessment of the pool's talent level to be so horrifically inflated. It is, after all, basically the only thing we have to go by.
I'm reluctant to speak for others, so I'll stop and change tack.
Here's what I would like to see.
What I want is a fair cross-section of talent to choose from that the scouts have provided at least a ballpark (sorry) assessment of but that I can then use my own rule(s) of thumb to make the final decision on which to draft, and to be given as good a chance for the picks I make to, in retrospect as the sim unfolds over the subsequent seasons, turn out to have been good (boom), bad (bust), or indifferent (in line with expectations), just as it happens IRL.
The vast majority of players as it currently stands in OOTP end up being busts of varying degrees from their original SCOUTED ratings. That unfairly makes us feel stupid or as if we're no good at the game, and increases the amount of negative feedback you'll get from us on the topic.
I want you to make it so the spread of original SCOUTED ratings v the players' actual talent levels are more evenly distributed to surprise on both the upside and downside.
Now, that's just one man's request.
All the same, I get the feeling this is what people are asking for in threads like this one. Not an adjustment to the pool's underlying talent level, but how it is originally assessed and presented.
Happy to be corrected if I'm off the mark.
G