drafts

Mattymo · 07-19-2007, 04:04 PM

Is there a definitive answer to this question?

Does the number of "5 star prospects" increase with the amount of teams/rounds in a draft?

So if I have a league with 8 teams and only 1 round, will there be the same amount as if I have 32 teams and 25 rounds? (I know, obviously, each year there is different types of player, and one year there could be 5 great players, while the next there could be 1, but generally speaking).

1998 Yankees · 07-20-2007, 09:52 AM

If the game is designed to preserve a balance of player quality by creating an array talents accordingly, wouldn't you think that a larger draft pool would contain more 5-star players? I have to think that if you have your draft set up properly, that this is built into the game.

That's a big "if," though. That is why there has been so much discussion here on the proper number of draft rounds according to the number of teams in your league; too many rounds for a certain number of teams creates too many good players and therefore disturbs the balance of quality in the game, is my take on that.

Mattymo · 07-20-2007, 10:23 AM

1998, what you say makes sense.

However...I would think that the number of "great" players is not dependent on how many teams/rounds. In my opinion, there should be an increased number of average/poor players. Take MLB's amateur draft, if you set that draft at 100 rounds, there would still be the same amount of great/good/decent prospects. Teams would then start drafting more guys who wouldn't have been picked otherwise.

I don't know if it's possible, but I'd love to see it where, every year there were a certain amount (not percentage) of 5-star, 4-star, 3-star and so on. After that, the game would just create a bunch of 20/20 guys in order to fill out rosters, etc. Obviously that "amount" would vary from year to year, but it wouldn't be based on a percentage of players created.

1998 Yankees · 07-20-2007, 10:39 AM

I see what you are saying, but I don't think it could be true. I have no data (one of the experts will come by to comment soon, I anticipate

) but think of it this way: You create a large league but the number of great players is fixed and therefore spread very thin. The rest of the league is comprised of average and scrub players. How exciting would that be to play? The game designer would not want his creation to be boring in that manner, I am thinking.

injury log · 07-20-2007, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 1998 Yankees

I see what you are saying, but I don't think it could be true. I have no data (one of the experts will come by to comment soon, I anticipate

) but think of it this way: You create a large league but the number of great players is fixed and therefore spread very thin. The rest of the league is comprised of average and scrub players.

I agree with Mattymo about how this ought to work, and if the number of great players was calibrated to the length of the draft round, there would be an equal percentage of great players per team in the draft, regardless of the size of the league. I'm also interested to know how the game works now, but I do think the draft should be set up in a 'foolproof' way, so that regardless of the length of the draft, extreme talent inflation or deflation is impossible.

Mattymo · 07-20-2007, 01:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by injury log

I agree with Mattymo about how this ought to work, and if the number of great players was calibrated to the length of the draft round, there would be an equal percentage of great players per team in the draft, regardless of the size of the league. I'm also interested to know how the game works now, but I do think the draft should be set up in a 'foolproof' way, so that regardless of the length of the draft, extreme talent inflation or deflation is impossible.

...unless, of course, you raise the modifiers so that better players are created.

Though 1998yankees does make a good point (and of course he does, he's a bright, sophisticated Yankee fan), I still think it should work this way.

07-19-2007, 04:04 PM	#1
Mattymo All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: Colchester, CT Posts: 1,448	drafts Is there a definitive answer to this question? Does the number of "5 star prospects" increase with the amount of teams/rounds in a draft? So if I have a league with 8 teams and only 1 round, will there be the same amount as if I have 32 teams and 25 rounds? (I know, obviously, each year there is different types of player, and one year there could be 5 great players, while the next there could be 1, but generally speaking).

07-20-2007, 09:52 AM	#2
1998 Yankees Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Yankee Stadium, back in 1998. Posts: 8,645	If the game is designed to preserve a balance of player quality by creating an array talents accordingly, wouldn't you think that a larger draft pool would contain more 5-star players? I have to think that if you have your draft set up properly, that this is built into the game. That's a big "if," though. That is why there has been so much discussion here on the proper number of draft rounds according to the number of teams in your league; too many rounds for a certain number of teams creates too many good players and therefore disturbs the balance of quality in the game, is my take on that.

07-20-2007, 10:23 AM	#3
Mattymo All Star Starter Join Date: May 2002 Location: Colchester, CT Posts: 1,448	1998, what you say makes sense. However...I would think that the number of "great" players is not dependent on how many teams/rounds. In my opinion, there should be an increased number of average/poor players. Take MLB's amateur draft, if you set that draft at 100 rounds, there would still be the same amount of great/good/decent prospects. Teams would then start drafting more guys who wouldn't have been picked otherwise. I don't know if it's possible, but I'd love to see it where, every year there were a certain amount (not percentage) of 5-star, 4-star, 3-star and so on. After that, the game would just create a bunch of 20/20 guys in order to fill out rosters, etc. Obviously that "amount" would vary from year to year, but it wouldn't be based on a percentage of players created.

07-20-2007, 10:39 AM	#4
1998 Yankees Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Yankee Stadium, back in 1998. Posts: 8,645	I see what you are saying, but I don't think it could be true. I have no data (one of the experts will come by to comment soon, I anticipate ) but think of it this way: You create a large league but the number of great players is fixed and therefore spread very thin. The rest of the league is comprised of average and scrub players. How exciting would that be to play? The game designer would not want his creation to be boring in that manner, I am thinking.