|
I can understand why there is pushback from both sides with this, and I understand even more why the devs struggle to get it right in a way that keeps as many people happy as possible.
What seems to keep getting forgotten here is that the main issue lies not with player talent, but perceived player talent. More precisely, scouted player talent.
A pool overstocked with players rated way higher than their true talent level means you are being wildly misled on a league-wide basis, almost exclusively in a negative direction. Nothing to do with scout talent or the whole tools / ability continuum, but purely on the basis of spurious statistical distribution.
So, even at 100% scouting, you are being deceived to an inordinate degree. The vast majority of those players so highly rated initially will disappoint you with their "underwhelming" performance compared to this lofty original estimation thrust upon them.
Even a really solid 50-rated player can seem like a bust if you took him with an early R1 pick. Which is the inherent risk to the process, but the chances should at least be a bit more equitable, as is the case with the toned-down pool.
Remember, there's no way an 80-rated prospect can surprise you on the upside. I want the boom-bust equation to be more of a fair deal.
My thoughts, at any rate.
G
|