Scouts seem utterly worthless?

[KCRoyalsFan]

I sent multiple scouts to scout my stud prospect. Keep in mind his real potential ratings are 15/11/15

My head scout, who is my best scout gave him 19/15/19
My 2nd scout who is 20/19 in scouting pitching/pitching pot gave him a 15/11/16. This rating is MUCH more accurate.
Furthermore, my next 2 scouts gave him a 15/12/15, and a 16/11/16. Those scouts have very subpar ratings at scouting pitching (12ish).

Overall the average came out to be 16/12/16. This is very close to his real potential ratings of 16/12/16.

So I think if you really want to get the lowdown on a prospect that you should just send all your scouts to scout him and find out what the average is. That appears to be pretty accurate, at least in this players case.

I'll test more players.

[Erithtotl]

Well, this measures up actually with what I have observed. Because it seems the problem is that the scouts will never miss low. Not a single prospect on my roster turned out to be signficantly better than my scouts thought, they only turned out be worse. So if you had a guy who was already good, then you are only going to get evalautions that he is as good or better.

[Sven Draconian]

Lets look at an example:
Bartollo Padilla, 21 year old SP prospect.

My scouts give his movement potential of:
80
70
81
91

Fairly consistant in that its "good", some thing great, some think above aveage.

His actual movment potential:
153, meaning all but the 91 are fairly close, the 91 is a bit too optimistic, but 75% were good.

hmm and Stuff?
My guys give him a
46
60
49
40

His actual is 85. Again, 3 are close, 1 is a bit off.

And another player, John Miller, 19 year old closer in A ball
My scouts grade his stuff at
74
85
78

His actual is 163, so they were all fairly close

His movment is intersting, my guys grade him out at:
47
63
54

So there is a bit of variety, 17 point difference between the high and low. His acutal is 22, putting two in the neighboorhood (and my head scout at 63 being very close), with one a bit pessimistic.

I dont see anything wrong.

[KCRoyalsFan]

I did another test with my stud CF prospect.

His real ratings for contact/power/eye potentials are 16/17/6
My scouts gave him
16/17/6
16/14/5
16/17/6
16/17/6
17/20/9
15/16/5

for an average of
16/17/6

My scouts were dead on with this prospect. He is in the major though right now, even though is actual ratings are only around 9-10ish. I'm not sure if that has an effect on scouting. He is rather young at 22.

[Elendil]

Be sure you're also looking at recent evaluations from your scouts. I've seen scouting assessments change drastically over the period of a month or two, especially of prospects.

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Queensryche

Scouting in OOTP 2006-2007 sucks horribly. Just turn it off until they actually make it playable.

Please add something productive to a thread, all Ive seen you do is complain w/o explanation

[Queensryche]

Originally Posted by jbergey22

Please add something productive to a thread, all Ive seen you do is complain w/o explanation

Then you haven't read all my posts. Try reading my posts before you make yourself look like a fool next time.

[BusterKing]

Can Markus clear any of this up?

I find it strange that none of the beta testers are posting about this.

[KCRoyalsFan]

Originally Posted by Elendil

Be sure you're also looking at recent evaluations from your scouts. I've seen scouting assessments change drastically over the period of a month or two, especially of prospects.

Yeah I have noticed that as well.

I am seeing somewhat what the original poster said. I haven't seen very many players that are underrated. Most are either dead on or slightly overrated.

[Elendil]

Originally Posted by BusterKing

Can Markus clear any of this up?

I find it strange that none of the beta testers are posting about this.

I'm a beta tester. (However, I never tested with scouts on - this wasn't my dept.)

[jbergey22]

Originally Posted by Queensryche

Then you haven't read all my posts. Try reading my posts before you make yourself look like a fool next time.

Unfortunately I have wasted my time reading too many of your posts one of which states the scouting system is absolutely worthless w/o reason is just an example.

I for one like the challenge of not having a perfect scouting system making the game too easy. The way it is tends to make it more like real life which is exactly what I am after.

[KCRoyalsFan]

After doing some tests and seeing that even though I have the best pitching scout in the game he can still mess up big time, I will most definitely be sending all of my scouts to evaluate draft talent.

[Elendil]

Originally Posted by KCRoyalsFan

After doing some tests and seeing that even though I have the best pitching scout in the game he can still mess up big time, I will most definitely be sending all of my scouts to evaluate draft talent.

I have found that the "wisdom of the crowds" seems to apply here. The average score from a bunch of mediocre scouts is usually more accurate than a single score from a great scout. IMO that is as it should be.

[KCRoyalsFan]

Originally Posted by Elendil

I have found that the "wisdom of the crowds" seems to apply here. The average score from a bunch of mediocre scouts is usually more accurate than a single score from a great scout. IMO that is as it should be.

definitely. But, sometimes I would expect my head scout who is a master at scouting pitching to find the next pedro martinez, while my other scouts might think that the pitcher sucks and will never develop. I have yet to see something like that happen. Of course, I haven't done much testing

[KCRoyalsFan]

I have just thought of a feature that I think some of you might like to see added.

When you looking at the draft prospects, FA pool, or maybe just one players profile. Wouldn't it be nice to be able to click on scouting and have an option of "avg score" which would be the average of all your scouts thoughts on the player instead of just being able to look at one scouts ratings at at time?

[Raidergoo]

Scouting error is working as designed. This was looked at. Here's some data.

Error avg		0.129190882	13% is the error average for SISA		
Max error		29			
					
				    Years Pro	   Error average/rating	       Error %	      Players
For 0 Pro years players: 		0		0.179071141		18%		138  
For 1 Pro years players:		1		0.144380262		15%		138
For 2 Pro years players:		2		0.159432522		16%		160
For 3 Pro years players:		3		0.113848504		11%		185
For 4 Pro years players:		4		0.137739045		13%		168
For 5 Pro years players:		5		0.114065694		11%		169
For 6 Pro years players:		6		0.140923622		11%		63
For 7 Pro years players:		7		0.116287087		11%		47
For 8 Pro years players:		8		0.099825567	 	9%		35
For 9 Pro years players:		9		0.054448421	 	5%		25
For 10 Pro years players:		10		0.042398696	 	4%		12
For 10+ Pro years players:		10+		0.029110581	 	3%		59

		SISA		100 Scout	75 Scout	50 Scout
Error Avg	3.867132867	1.251748252	2.839160839	5.958041958
Error Max	27		6		21		29

Here are some operating theories behind scouting. The older, more established players will have more accurate evaluations. The higher rated scouts will be more accurate. Never trust a single scouting report; cross check everything and everyone, then do it again. Scouts will rarely underestimate talent, but will overestimate talent.

[Erithtotl]

As per my point before, the problem doesn't appear to be underrating, but overrating. Do your scouts rate highly guys who actually are terrible?

For example, picking another fielder (and switching to 1-100 scale), my top two scouts rate him at 85/43/73 and 86/41/71.

Actual? 123/44/97. Divided by two that's 61/22/48

Thats an overestimate of: %139/%191/%150

Player 2:
Top scouts: 53/58/64, 55/54/62. Actual? 72/63/82 or 36/31/41.
Overestimate: %150/%180/%154

Player 3:
Top scouts: 63/54/63 and 55/52/61. Actual: 77/62/88 or 38/31/44
Overestimate: %155/%171/%141

Player 4:
Top 69/63/68 and 61/61/66 Actual: 88/81/99 or 44/40/50
Overestimate: %147/%155/%134

My 'top' prospect:
Top 73/92/64 and 75/90/62 Actual: 100/142/78 or 50/71/39
Overestimate: 148%/128%/161%

Average overestimate: %148/%165/%148

Here's the interesting thing.

I've noticed that on all these players, my lesser scouts, the ones with hitting/potential ratings of around 12-13 rather than 19 like my top two guys, are consistently MUCH closer to the actual ratings on all of these players.

One wild guess? My top two scouts have their strategy settings 2 notches towards prefer veterans. But the thing is, I can change that setting to wahtever I want, so I'm not sure what that has to do with anything, especially since changing it to 'favor prospects' does not seem to alter their scout reports.

[Raidergoo]

Originally Posted by Erithtotl

As per my point before, the problem doesn't appear to be underrating, but overrating. Do your scouts rate highly guys who actually are terrible?

That's working as designed.

[KCRoyalsFan]

Are you using recent scouting reports?

Your numbers are a lot farther off than mine. Instead of just taking 2 scouts words for it, try scouting them with all your scouts and post the average score and see what you get. I find that to be MUCH more accurate.

[Erithtotl]

Originally Posted by KCRoyalsFan

Are you using recent scouting reports?

Your numbers are a lot farther off than mine. Instead of just taking 2 scouts words for it, try scouting them with all your scouts and post the average score and see what you get. I find that to be MUCH more accurate.

These are reports that were just submitted. You are correct, it does seem that the average report is more accurate. But it seems it is only more accurate because my two best scouts consistently overesitmate, while my bad scouts are much closer. This should be the opposite!