Draft pool low quality of players?

[Orcin]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

I could have made this post, especially the bolded part. Very well said. I am fine with the potential levels for most players being low or uncertain (a vast majority of players don't make it anywhere, after all, and that's accurate), but with the way it is, I see little reason to participate in the draft after the first couple of rounds (at most) since all of the players look more or less the same to me. I think your solutions are constructive, too. I'd love to see additional information on prospects, maybe something like their boom/bust potential in different areas, things like that, to help make drafting decisions more meaningful and not completely random and luck based, which may be somewhat true of the MLB draft but isn't any fun in the game.

We know from books like Moneyball and whatnot that GMs take the draft very seriously and have deep draft boards and definitely have specific guys they want to take even deep in the draft, but I don't get that feeling in an OOTP draft. I feel completely powerless, like my decisions in that regard are meaningless and random.

I could have made this post. In fact, I have made this post - last year. My experience is the same as yours. I want the draft to challenge me. As it stands now, it is a boring chore in a fictional league, and like shooting fish in a barrel in a historical league.

[Habsfan18]

What have I done..?

[jaysdailydose]

I'm currently simulating the last two years of the simulation I ran while I slept last night, which started as an 16 team fictional with league evolution turned on with locked 2014 settings.

It also generated the default amount of international free agents, discoveries, etc -- and had free agency and the draft enabled from the start. I then allowed the league to evolve with everything checked except for schedule length.

I didn't save scouting reports, but I can check any of the leaderboards, etc to let you see what types of players are in, or where players were drafted that made the Hall of Fame, etc.

I've got it on a quick-sim friendly setup with no news logs and the like saving, but I'll contribute to the thread whatever I can out of the 100 years when finished, just ask me what you'd like to see!

[jaysdailydose]

Before I do post that information, let me again say that I absolutely endorse the feeder system in any scenario when you can use it realistically. It adds an extremely fun layer and extra "roleplaying" opportunity, as well as giving you actual history on players that you can use to scout.

[jaysdailydose]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

Not all of those players come from the draft. Many are coming as international free agents or posted Japanese league players. Which is another reason why the draft pool should not be loaded with multi-star prospects.

I was looking over the history before I started running out the final two seasons to get it to 100, but yes, I'm seeing a lot of guys that didn't enter in the draft in the leaderboards.

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

A 2-3 WAR guy for a career is not a good player. I'm talking career, not a single season.

Okay. I think you need to talk about seasons. Not careers. I think you need to do this because a prospect's "star" rating is a projection of his ceiling--which is a performance at peak, hence measured best at a season resolution. I don't know the "right" gradients. But, as an example, last year 1,305 players appeared in the majors. In that year:

WAR = 6+ (15 players = 1.1% of player seasons) [I suggest these are 5* seasons]
WAR = 4-6 (39 players = 3.0%) [4*-5* seasons]?
WAR = 3-4 (31 players = 2.4%) [3*-4* seasons]?
WAR = 2-3 (52 players = 4%) [2*-3* seasons]?
WAR = 0-2 (311 players = 23.8%) [1*-2* seasons]?
WAR = <0 (856 players = 65.6%) [0*-1* seasons]]

So 137 players existed who created a season that was pretty positive (2 WAR or more). They had to come from someplace. In OOTP, this is generally the draft ... one reason the MLB draft classes are perhaps not the best to look at right now is that a large portion of players coming into the league are coming in from international signings rather than the draft pool...which is maybe (?) different from the past. Regardless, I think there is value at projecting a prospect based on peak season WAR, not career WAR.

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Yes, thank you. Pretty darn nearly half the elite players in MLB come from the July 2nd IFA signings or other leagues.

This is why (for OOTP purposes) you cannot look at modern draft classes as the model for most leagues. The goal needs to be do design a process that feeds the proper skills and talents into the majors. For OOTP leagues that use feeders, that's one concept, for those who do not, that's another concept. But the design goal is NOT to match real life draft classes for any particular team, but IS to create a feeder environment that creates players that perform properly in the majors (and is fun to participate in).

It's a subtle difference. But an important one.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by RonCo

Regardless, I think there is value at projecting a prospect based on peak season WAR, not career WAR.

I don't think this would actually change much.

There just aren't that many guys who put up a 2-3 WAR season but have a career WAR that's lower than that. The might be a couple guys who did that, but then the question becomes are they actually 2-3 WAR peak guys if they were below replacement level for the entire rest of their careers.

That's leaving out the fact that most 2-3 WAR career guys put that number up in quite a few seasons, not just one or two. So they likely "peaked" at a level barely better than a replacement player, maybe 0.5-1 WAR or so.

So looking a career WAR's at the 2-3 level or above is going to catch 99.99% of the guys who ever put up a 2-3 WAR season and the other .01 % is not worth catching imo.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by RonCo

This is why (for OOTP purposes) you cannot look at modern draft classes as the model for most leagues. The goal needs to be do design a process that feeds the proper skills and talents into the majors. For OOTP leagues that use feeders, that's one concept, for those who do not, that's another concept. But the design goal is NOT to match real life draft classes for any particular team, but IS to create a feeder environment that creates players that perform properly in the majors (and is fun to participate in).

It's a subtle difference. But an important one.

Why?

OOTP has around half of it's MLB talent players coming from int amateur signings and established int signings as well now. It essentially perfectly recreates the proper player sources for the modern MLB. So why wouldn't we look at the modern draft in regard to the OOTP draft? I really don't get the point you're making here at all, sorry Can you clarify?

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Why?

OOTP has around half of it's MLB talent players coming from int amateur signings and established int signings as well now. It essentially perfectly recreates the proper player sources for the modern MLB. So why wouldn't we look at the modern draft in regard to the OOTP draft? I really don't get the point you're making here at all, sorry Can you clarify?

A league like the FOBL (and I'm sure many others) uses only the draft to create and take in new players. Remember the old "Play it Your Way?" phrase?

[BIG17EASY]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Why?

OOTP has around half of it's MLB talent players coming from int amateur signings and established int signings as well now. It essentially perfectly recreates the proper player sources for the modern MLB. So why wouldn't we look at the modern draft in regard to the OOTP draft? I really don't get the point you're making here at all, sorry Can you clarify?

I think he's talking in terms of fictional leagues that don't have the international free agents coming from feeder leagues or being generated. Which is a valid point. But again, I still think the draft works well as is. I have a fictional league (created in OOTP14) of 18 teams with three levels of minors, all located in the Mid-Atlantic region of the U.S., and I am not seeing a lack of quality talent with the current draft model being the only source of incoming players.

[RonCo]

There is actually a fairly "simple" way to fix the "problem," or at least there was (fully disclosing that I'm 2-3 versions away from the guts of the system, so I may be completely out of line here...but I suspect not). But that "simple" way requires a very deep tear-up to the player creation and development process. So I know Markus views it as risky, and to be honest, I don't blame him. However, in the meantime, it's fair to note that this is more than an issue of perspective...though perspective clouds the conversation immensely.

[jaysdailydose]

Originally Posted by RonCo

A league like the FOBL (and I'm sure many others) uses only the draft to create and take in new players. Remember the old "Play it Your Way?" phrase?

But, if the game is pretty accurately projecting the correct player sources for the MLB, isn't it incumbent on you to make the changes to the system if you are going to play it your way?

There is a big difference between saying "This doesn't accurately reflect MLB" and "This doesn't accurately reflect how I want to play with only one player source."

I know that's not EXACTLY what you said, and I'm not trying to be snippy about it -- but let's face it, the majority of this game's base wants to recreate a MLB or a reasonable facsimile of it. When you are trying to do things a lot differently, you have to be the one that adjusts...

[The Wolf]

Originally Posted by Ruthian23

We know from books like Moneyball and whatnot that GMs take the draft very seriously and have deep draft boards and definitely have specific guys they want to take even deep in the draft, but I don't get that feeling in an OOTP draft. I feel completely powerless, like my decisions in that regard are meaningless and random.

That's my major complaint against the new system. Scouting prospects and drafting used to be a lot of the fun of OOTP. Now you might as well just use autodraft. Boring.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by RonCo

A league like the FOBL (and I'm sure many others) uses only the draft to create and take in new players. Remember the old "Play it Your Way?" phrase?

Ah gotcha.

But then I guess I'd just re-phrase what I already said in this post, and say that we're really talking about different things here.

Most of us are talking about the current version of the game and playing it more or less as it's designed and whether that yield fun and realistic results.

If a player or league is going to play it their way in a manner that's much different from the current design, I don't think it's terribly reasonable to request that the default design be be changed to accommodate that.

So the FOBL should absolutely play the game their way, I'm totally behind that. But then they'll have to make the adjustments and changes need to get that way to work themselves, using all the great customization tools Markus provides in OOTP.

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by BIG17EASY

I think he's talking in terms of fictional leagues that don't have the international free agents coming from feeder leagues or being generated. Which is a valid point. But again, I still think the draft works well as is. I have a fictional league (created in OOTP14) of 18 teams with three levels of minors, all located in the Mid-Atlantic region of the U.S., and I am not seeing a lack of quality talent with the current draft model being the only source of incoming players.

Yes And, as I said at the beginning of this. The process can be made to work, but it can be quite complex--especially for leagues that have been in existence for a long time and therefore deal with conversion issue (and the multiple player creation/development theories that have been in practice over those versions). We get caught up, though, arguing that "if you just do it my way, everything is great," when the design should be developed in such a fashion as a majority of users can make the game work the way they want to play.

The discussion on "stars" is a bit extraneous...but, for example, if the design allowed a commissioner to pick what they considered 5*, 4*, 3*, 2*, and 1* seasonal performances, then every league to deal with it however the heck they wanted to deal with it. This is the mentality that I think Markus tries to go with where ever possible...and it's the way the community should be asking him to think. I want you to have the environment you want, as long as I can have the environment I want.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by RonCo

Yes And, as I said at the beginning of this. The process can be made to work, but it can be quite complex--especially for leagues that have been in existence for a long time and therefore deal with conversion issue (and the multiple player creation/development theories that have been in practice over those versions). We get caught up, though, arguing that "if you just do it my way, everything is great," when the design should be developed in such a fashion as a majority of users can make the game work the way they want to play.

The discussion on "stars" is a bit extraneous...but, for example, if the design allowed a commissioner to pick what they considered 5*, 4*, 3*, 2*, and 1* seasonal performances, then every league to deal with it however the heck they wanted to deal with it. This is the mentality that I think Markus tries to go with where ever possible...and it's the way the community should be asking him to think. I want you to have the environment you want, as long as I can have the environment I want.

I don't think t's so much a matter of "if you just do it my way, everything is great." It's more a matter that there can only be one default setting. Markus tries to pick the default that makes the most sense overall and is most realistic. So if you want to run a setup other than the default, as jaysdailydose said, you have to be the one that adjusts.

Fortunately Markus has provided a ton of customization options that allow that adjustment process to happen. You really can play the game game your way, just by taking advantage of them, as you no doubt well know.

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Most of us are talking about the current version of the game and playing it more or less as it's designed and whether that yield fun and realistic results.

If a player or league is going to play it their way in a manner that's much different from the current design, I don't think it's terribly reasonable to request that the default design be be changed to accommodate that.

So the FOBL should absolutely play the game their way, I'm totally behind that. But then they'll have to make the adjustments and changes need to get that way to work themselves, using all the great customization tools Markus provides in OOTP.

I know you don't speak for Markus, who has constantly worked to keep the big, grandfather leagues going and happy. But I think there is value in key members of the community understanding the entire populations' needs, and advocating for them to be met if at all practical. To start with the message of "hey, I don't really know about your situation, but if you don't want to play with international signings (or feeder leagues, or whatever), then just suck it up" is a little off-putting. Markus has always at least attempted to support lots of little idiosyncrasies, and player creation issues are basic to all leagues. I suggest it's always best to start with... "huh ... well ... what's the scoop on your situation, and what needs to change to make it work right?"

Otherwise, who would start a league they intended to have running for decades if they thought the game was just going to shut them out at some random time in the future?

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by The Wolf

That's my major complaint against the new system. Scouting prospects and drafting used to be a lot of the fun of OOTP. Now you might as well just use autodraft. Boring.

That's a valid point.

For the folks that don't like the new system, what would you propose to make it more fun for you?

The old system of creating higher ratings and knocking them down was equally unpopular with a different group and also led to some other side issues. So I don't think there's any chance of it coming back.

My point being that any proposal should probably not just be" bring the old system back".

But beyond that, do you guys have some ideas on what would make things more fun for you again?

[RonCo]

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Fortunately Markus has provided a ton of customization options that allow that adjustment process to happen. You really can play the game game your way, just by taking advantage of them, as you no doubt well know.

Your warning to FOBL says that they are now hosed. They need to crank the talent levels to keep things running, but you predict dire results.

Just being a devil's advocate there.

The point is that Markus can't meet design requirements if they aren't thought through fully and smartly...and (for example) saying that the draft process should look just like the MLB's is a bad design criteria...the design criteria for OOTP should be to create the proper player quantities and whatnot, tied to scouting and development algorithms that are integrated properly, and then funneled through whatever intake process a league uses--be it draft, international signings, feeder leagues, whatever.

Thinking about it properly at the base level is the only way to get it right.