Quote:
Originally Posted by locuspc
But now you have that same problem, just in rounds 4 through 20.
|
True, but what I'd say is IRL an "elite" talent is supposed to stand out from the group. How often have we heard those old-schoolers talk about when you see a 5 tool player and how you know it when you see it and it leaves you drooling over those guys and how they don't come around often and blah blah. I'd rather those guys be given the 5 stars
Again IRL, when you're reviewing the "good" players who are draft worthy but not those OMG 5 star guys, yeah a lot of those guys are like picking a name out of a hat as they all blend together and nobody stands out from the pack..... So I'm perfectly fine with these changes assuming that they were properly executed.
I had the idea of maybe giving each prospect a "projected draft position" type of grade which would just more or less be a formula that the engine runs behind the scenes that maybe averages out the potential of their individual skills to come up with a cumulative score for each guy..... So they could say even though these 200 players are all 2.5 to 3 star potential, these 50 are projected for rounds 2-3, these 50 are projected for rounds 4-5, etc......... essentially doing a little bit of "automatic filtering" for us.
But regardless of that, the big cluster of guys should be the middle of the pack guys, because again just like IRL nothing sets them apart and nothing makes them stand out.
Plus, for my own selfish reasons.... I haven't truly "hit" on a first round pick in god knows how long so I'm not going to complain with some extra scouting clarity for that 1st round haha