How to boost the First-Year Player Draft to be deeper/better?

Gai1997 · 07-06-2015, 01:44 PM

I'm not satisfied with how deep the drafts are in my saves and I would like some help from you guys on how I can get the CPU to generate better players. I'm looking for more 4-5 stars and more of those 4-5 stars in numbers. Even if that's not how it's supposed to be, that doesn't matter to me, I'm okay with it.

Currently the game keeps generating sometimes only ONE 5-star in the draft, like THREE 4-stars and then a little bit of 3-star's and the rest are scrubs. Choosing at #30 a team would get a 1.5-star. I don't like that. I want a ridiculously deep draft. I want 3-stars to be available even in the 3rd round.

How would I get this to work? I can use feeder leagues if they are needed for this to happen. I'd like to get this done without having to import a draft class every year if possible.

Thank you!

Orcin · 07-06-2015, 03:44 PM

This thread might help you.

http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...y-players.html

sprague · 07-06-2015, 05:29 PM

I have found the same things. even in my fictional leagues.

Now after inagural draft I change the PCM's
Pitchers to 1.010 or 1.020

Hitters for eye, avoid K, gap 1-030
power and average (or whatever that attribute is called) 1.040

Getting much better draft classes

mpejkrm · 07-06-2015, 06:22 PM

Personally I would agree with you, I think having decent (read: not elite) prospect available throughout the first five or six round (Maybe even ten) that aren't destined bench player/relievers would be somewhat more realistic. However as of now there isn't a way to do that without increasing the PCM's which can have adverse affects in other facets of the game.

Rain King · 07-07-2015, 08:00 PM

Star ratings are relative. If you have the game create more good players, the star level of a player that can contribute to a major league team is just going to go up. On default, a 1-star player can absolutely be a useful major league player. You can increase the talent if you want, but that will then stop being the case...you would be increasing the level of talent in your universe and therefore increasing the star rating of your replacement players.

Now, another thing at play regarding star ratings is whether you have "All player ratings are displayed relative to:" checked. Checking that will allow you to change the talent level you want the players' to be measured against when creating their star rating. IMO, if you want to use star ratings as a measure throughout the draft you should be checking that box and adjusting the relative league level every time you start running out of high star players. It kind of gives you the best of both worlds...the universe stays balanced (which might not happen if you increase talent modifiers), but you have a way to distinguish between the 1-star (relative to your major league) players.

sprague · 07-08-2015, 07:21 AM

I have to disagree with much of this. The draft classes are just too low in ratings. Especially for batters.

I am saying this not from looking at stars, but being in commissioner mode and looking directly at the player potential ratings.
In a recent 20 team league I played as a test (with 1.000 modifiers for PCM's) there was one decent batter in the draft class. The second best batter of a 200 total draft class had batter ratings of 98 90 99 97 107
with decent speed and ok defense.
That was the number 2 batter chosen overall. It is very rare to have a class at all with say 3 decent hitters coming through at all.
That is why I raise the PCM's. It doesn't really change much in the players 10-200 in the draft, but it does make some increases in the top 10 for the draft, thus now if someone is drafting the second best hitter talent, it is at least someone that will likely be a part of their starting 8 in the future.

pjh5165 · 07-08-2015, 07:43 AM

If you think the draft classes are lacking in talent, sim 20-30 years and look at the state of your league . You'll still have your superstars, solid starters, bench guys, and scrubs. Everything works as intended. There's enough talent in the drafts, and not being able to differentiate much between players after the top guys is very realistic and is why the MLB Draft is so unpredictable.

DrSatan · 07-08-2015, 08:36 PM

I have a 20 team league as well as a current MLB league. I'm not experiencing the same lack of talent that is being mentioned. However, I do play with scouts at 100% accurate, so I see the actual ratings.

Talent Change Randomness plays a big part in minor league players. After the first couple rounds there isn't much left, so I sort by categories and try to find players with something to work with (high contact, stuff, multiple positions, etc). I also sort by intelligence and work ethic. These attributes will factor into the kind of "boost" your prospects get. On the other side, 5-star prospects with low work ethic and intelligence are more likely to bust, so I stay away from them.

Using this method, I've had many late round guys make the big leagues, and I've have a few end up in the HOF.

I also dump a lot of money in development and try to find good coaches. I have no idea if that is helping or not, but its what I do.

Fyrestorm3 · 07-08-2015, 09:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpejkrm

Personally I would agree with you, I think having decent (read: not elite) prospect available throughout the first five or six round (Maybe even ten) that aren't destined bench player/relievers would be somewhat more realistic. However as of now there isn't a way to do that without increasing the PCM's which can have adverse affects in other facets of the game.

Just want to point out that, while I can understand and relate to the desire for something like this - and indeed, think the game would benefit from the ability to customize draft talent levels - it would be very, very far from "realistic". Once the second round's over, the MLB draft is a veritable crapshoot. If the draft were producing 150-300 decent prospects every draft, even if you don't want/expect all 300 of those players to pan out, every single team's minor league system would be chock full of talent every year.

mpejkrm · 07-08-2015, 10:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fyrestorm3

Just want to point out that, while I can understand and relate to the desire for something like this - and indeed, think the game would benefit from the ability to customize draft talent levels - it would be very, very far from "realistic". Once the second round's over, the MLB draft is a veritable crapshoot. If the draft were producing 150-300 decent prospects every draft, even if you don't want/expect all 300 of those players to pan out, every single team's minor league system would be chock full of talent every year.

That's why I've been fooling around with the PCM's to try and find a way to get more prospects to "bust". It's a process.

Lukas Berger · 07-08-2015, 10:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpejkrm

That's why I've been fooling around with the PCM's to try and find a way to get more prospects to "bust". It's a process.

I would think the TCR modifier would be more useful for that. The PCM's don't really control bust rate at all.

SirMichaelJordan · 07-08-2015, 10:53 PM

2 1/2 star potential is considered a good prospect. Keep that in mind.

Lukas Berger · 07-08-2015, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mpejkrm

Personally I would agree with you, I think having decent (read: not elite) prospect available throughout the first five or six round (Maybe even ten) that aren't destined bench player/relievers would be somewhat more realistic.

Given a discussion or two with Markus, I've modified my previous stance a bit, and I do think it might be worth taking a look at draft talent in beta for OOTP17, but you lose me a bit here.

Guys taken outside the first couple rounds irl are not even destined bench players/relievers, the vast majority are destined career MiLB players.

The best of them are maybe bench players and a very, very random few can be more that that, but it's very few, and essentially random.

Take a look at past drafts in B-R's db to see what I mean.

You mention the fifth round. Randomly starting at a point where careers have already been mostly completed, 2000, and going back a few years we find this:

5th round, 2000 draft: 7 of 30 players played in MLB. 0 starters, 1 RP (Jenks), 1 bench player (Garret Atkins), 5 replacement level players.

5th round, 1999 draft: 11 of 30 players played in MLB. 2 poor SP's (Saunders, Robertson), 9 replacement level players.

5th round, 1998 draft: 11 of 30 players played in MLB. 1 starter (Aubrey Huff), 1 poor SP (Vogelsong, who only got decent in his 30's after being released/playing in Japan), 1 RP (Ryan Drese), 8 replacement level players.

5th round 1997 draft: 10 of 30 players played in MLB. 1 star (Michael Young), 3 RP (Choate, Ramirez, Justin Miller), 6 replacement level players.

5th round, 1996 draft: 14 of 30 players played in MLB. 1 starter (Joe Crede), 1 good SP (Brad Penny), 12 replacement level players.

I could go back further with more time, but the distribution is remarkably similar.

That's 5 drafts, 150 players. 53 (35%ish) played in MLB, only 11 (around 7-8%) were generally above replacement level, only 6-7 (around 5%) of those were more than bench players/relievers and only 4 (3% ish) were actually good regulars/SP's.

If we were assigning these guys * potential in game at draft time to match their careers, only 5-6 would be above 1 * players.

Given that, why would it be realistic for most guys available in the 5th or 6th rounds to be better than "destined bench player/relievers"?

Lukas Berger · 07-08-2015, 11:50 PM

Beyond that, consider this.

There are 25 MLB roster slots per team.

Including the supp round, basically 6 players per team are drafted in the first 5 rounds of each draft.

So that adds up to an essentially full MLB roster worth of players every 4 years, just out of the first 5 rounds.

The average career is what, 5-10 years? So just taking the players in the first five rounds of those ten years, you come out with around 60 players per team.

Taking the first two rounds, you come out with around 30 players per team in that period.

Given that some careers are shorter and some longer, you can massage those numbers a bit if you want.

So overall, just on the basis of simple mathematics, 4th-5th round players are not likely MLB players.

Based simply on the amount of MLB roster slots available and amount of players taken, there are likely only roughly 2-3 rounds worth of future decent, and far less future good MLB players available in any draft.

Lukas Berger · 07-09-2015, 02:15 AM

Actually, I was having a brain cramp writing the above post

It's written as if the draft is the only way that talent comes into MLB, whereas it only accounts for around half of MLB players, the rest are international signings and other players who didn't come through the draft.

So the numbers in the post really need to be halved, or doubled in some cases, to reflect that, which only shows more clearly just how few decent MLB players it's even possible to get from any one draft.

sprague · 07-09-2015, 02:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Actually, I was having a brain cramp writing the above post

It's written as if the draft is the only way that talent comes into MLB, whereas it only accounts for around half of MLB players, the rest are international signings and other players who didn't come through the draft.

So the numbers in the post really need to be halved, or doubled in some cases, to reflect that, which only shows more clearly just how few decent MLB players it's even possible to get from any one draft.

Basically I agree with you. But what of someone like me who plays a fictional league with no international free agent of any kind. All of my talent needs to come through the draft. That is what I mean by talent too low as there are no other places to get it in my world.

Lukas Berger · 07-09-2015, 03:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sprague

Basically I agree with you. But what of someone like me who plays a fictional league with no international free agent of any kind. All of my talent needs to come through the draft. That is what I mean by talent too low as there are no other places to get it in my world.

Yeah, I could see that being a bit of an issue. I think the numbers still look pretty good for that sort of setup as my "brain-cramp" post two posts up indicates.

Still, I think this is something we're going to look at for 17, at least I'll certainly bring it up in my discussions with Markus.

Overall, there's not really any such thing as talent being too low, or even too high. OOTP can pretty much deal with any kind of ratings matrix and produce good results, even if the talent seems low at draft time. Results are primarily driven by the league totals, not individual player ratings. The big issue with the individual ratings comes if they're too high overall, as that creates too flat a statistical distribution, that makes it hard to have any real star players.

I think the main issue with folks feeling the drafts are rated too low is that draft classes that feel like they have too little talent make the draft, and thus the game, a little less fun, even if the end results work out ok. So that's something to look at for sure.

That being said, there's nothing wrong with a slight boost to the pcm's if you feel that's needed. Your numbers posted above seem very reasonable, and I don't think they're anywhere near high enough to create issues with flat statistical distributions. So if they make you happier and provide more enjoyment at draft time, then you should absolutely use them!

sprague · 07-09-2015, 08:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lukasberger

Yeah, I could see that being a bit of an issue. I think the numbers still look pretty good for that sort of setup as my "brain-cramp" post two posts up indicates.

Still, I think this is something we're going to look at for 17, at least I'll certainly bring it up in my discussions with Markus.

Overall, there's not really any such thing as talent being too low, or even too high. OOTP can pretty much deal with any kind of ratings matrix and produce good results, even if the talent seems low at draft time. Results are primarily driven by the league totals, not individual player ratings. The big issue with the individual ratings comes if they're too high overall, as that creates too flat a statistical distribution, that makes it hard to have any real star players.

I think the main issue with folks feeling the drafts are rated too low is that draft classes that feel like they have too little talent make the draft, and thus the game, a little less fun, even if the end results work out ok. So that's something to look at for sure.

That being said, there's nothing wrong with a slight boost to the pcm's if you feel that's needed. Your numbers posted above seem very reasonable, and I don't think they're anywhere near high enough to create issues with flat statistical distributions. So if they make you happier and provide more enjoyment at draft time, then you should absolutely use them!

A really good response Lukas.

So you know. Those slight adjustments for me have not changed rounds 2 to the end of the draft at all. Those players seem to be the same potential rated as before. Basically with just that slight PCM boost there is only a change in the top 10 or 12 players in the first round of the draft- and not that much.
Instead of the #2 hitter coming in with a contact of say .306 now he comes in at .315 or maybe .319- A Hr guy that was showing 161, might now come in at 172 rating- while not much, does feel like there are few "better" players coming at the top of the draft.

Good luck with the discussions. I know its a topic that has been discussed on these forums for a few years.

marc5477 · 07-09-2015, 08:41 AM

Just remember that depending on how you set up ratings, even if you did what you want, because there are more 4-5 star players being made, they will neutralize each other pushing their stats down in the long run. Said differently, if you boost everything then the net change will be nothing. Instead of having a superstar dominate mostly average pitchers, they will now face superstar pitchers left and right and their hitting will decline to what you currently consider average. This also applies to pitchers. Again it depends entirely on your league settings.

This "epidemic of superstars" happened to me once when I started playing ootp a few years ago and I ended up having to delete that league and starting over. In the next league I turned all the PCM's down to about .75 to reduce the number of superstars being made. This was obviously fixed in Ootp16 because now it is much harder to develop superstars and that makes them more unique and valuable to have. Play how you like but be warned because it ruined one of my leagues in the past.

SirMichaelJordan · 07-09-2015, 09:06 AM

I think rather than bumping draft prospects ratings up from what they are at, scouting should be looked at instead. I play with the lowest setting of accuracy and the fog is still too little. Major league vets will have pretty much 0 fog and thats fine but when it comes to prospects (especially at draft time) the fog should be really thick but as of now the ratings are only off but a few (OSA might give a guy a 5 in power on a 2-8 scale while my poor scout may show 4 or 6)

This is fine for the current rating but the fog of potential should be thicker giving the illusion of a decent draft. I think scouting in OOTP needs a bit of an overhaul and needs to be more immersive than what it is. Scouting the draft is really not necessary as of now.

07-06-2015, 01:44 PM	#1
Gai1997 Major Leagues Join Date: Aug 2014 Posts: 370	How to boost the First-Year Player Draft to be deeper/better? I'm not satisfied with how deep the drafts are in my saves and I would like some help from you guys on how I can get the CPU to generate better players. I'm looking for more 4-5 stars and more of those 4-5 stars in numbers. Even if that's not how it's supposed to be, that doesn't matter to me, I'm okay with it. Currently the game keeps generating sometimes only ONE 5-star in the draft, like THREE 4-stars and then a little bit of 3-star's and the rest are scrubs. Choosing at #30 a team would get a 1.5-star. I don't like that. I want a ridiculously deep draft. I want 3-stars to be available even in the 3rd round. How would I get this to work? I can use feeder leagues if they are needed for this to happen. I'd like to get this done without having to import a draft class every year if possible. Thank you!

07-07-2015, 08:00 PM	#5
Rain King Hall Of Famer Join Date: Nov 2005 Posts: 2,111	Star ratings are relative. If you have the game create more good players, the star level of a player that can contribute to a major league team is just going to go up. On default, a 1-star player can absolutely be a useful major league player. You can increase the talent if you want, but that will then stop being the case...you would be increasing the level of talent in your universe and therefore increasing the star rating of your replacement players. Now, another thing at play regarding star ratings is whether you have "All player ratings are displayed relative to:" checked. Checking that will allow you to change the talent level you want the players' to be measured against when creating their star rating. IMO, if you want to use star ratings as a measure throughout the draft you should be checking that box and adjusting the relative league level every time you start running out of high star players. It kind of gives you the best of both worlds...the universe stays balanced (which might not happen if you increase talent modifiers), but you have a way to distinguish between the 1-star (relative to your major league) players. Last edited by Rain King; 07-07-2015 at 08:04 PM.

07-08-2015, 11:50 PM	#14
Lukas Berger OOTP Developments Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France Posts: 19,896	Beyond that, consider this. There are 25 MLB roster slots per team. Including the supp round, basically 6 players per team are drafted in the first 5 rounds of each draft. So that adds up to an essentially full MLB roster worth of players every 4 years, just out of the first 5 rounds. The average career is what, 5-10 years? So just taking the players in the first five rounds of those ten years, you come out with around 60 players per team. Taking the first two rounds, you come out with around 30 players per team in that period. Given that some careers are shorter and some longer, you can massage those numbers a bit if you want. So overall, just on the basis of simple mathematics, 4th-5th round players are not likely MLB players. Based simply on the amount of MLB roster slots available and amount of players taken, there are likely only roughly 2-3 rounds worth of future decent, and far less future good MLB players available in any draft. Last edited by Lukas Berger; 07-09-2015 at 04:08 AM.

07-09-2015, 02:15 AM	#15
Lukas Berger OOTP Developments Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Nice, Côte d'Azur, France Posts: 19,896	Actually, I was having a brain cramp writing the above post It's written as if the draft is the only way that talent comes into MLB, whereas it only accounts for around half of MLB players, the rest are international signings and other players who didn't come through the draft. So the numbers in the post really need to be halved, or doubled in some cases, to reflect that, which only shows more clearly just how few decent MLB players it's even possible to get from any one draft. Last edited by Lukas Berger; 07-09-2015 at 02:25 AM.

07-06-2015, 03:44 PM	#2
Orcin Hall Of Famer Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Indiana Posts: 9,798	This thread might help you. http://www.ootpdevelopments.com/boar...y-players.html

07-06-2015, 05:29 PM	#3
sprague All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 1,921	I have found the same things. even in my fictional leagues. Now after inagural draft I change the PCM's Pitchers to 1.010 or 1.020 Hitters for eye, avoid K, gap 1-030 power and average (or whatever that attribute is called) 1.040 Getting much better draft classes

07-06-2015, 06:22 PM	#4
mpejkrm All Star Reserve Join Date: Jul 2012 Location: Boston, MA Posts: 951	Personally I would agree with you, I think having decent (read: not elite) prospect available throughout the first five or six round (Maybe even ten) that aren't destined bench player/relievers would be somewhat more realistic. However as of now there isn't a way to do that without increasing the PCM's which can have adverse affects in other facets of the game.

07-08-2015, 07:21 AM	#6
sprague All Star Starter Join Date: Aug 2011 Posts: 1,921	I have to disagree with much of this. The draft classes are just too low in ratings. Especially for batters. I am saying this not from looking at stars, but being in commissioner mode and looking directly at the player potential ratings. In a recent 20 team league I played as a test (with 1.000 modifiers for PCM's) there was one decent batter in the draft class. The second best batter of a 200 total draft class had batter ratings of 98 90 99 97 107 with decent speed and ok defense. That was the number 2 batter chosen overall. It is very rare to have a class at all with say 3 decent hitters coming through at all. That is why I raise the PCM's. It doesn't really change much in the players 10-200 in the draft, but it does make some increases in the top 10 for the draft, thus now if someone is drafting the second best hitter talent, it is at least someone that will likely be a part of their starting 8 in the future.

07-08-2015, 07:43 AM	#7
pjh5165 Major Leagues Join Date: Jul 2013 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 410	If you think the draft classes are lacking in talent, sim 20-30 years and look at the state of your league . You'll still have your superstars, solid starters, bench guys, and scrubs. Everything works as intended. There's enough talent in the drafts, and not being able to differentiate much between players after the top guys is very realistic and is why the MLB Draft is so unpredictable.

07-08-2015, 08:36 PM	#8
DrSatan All Star Reserve Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Parts Unknown Posts: 535	I have a 20 team league as well as a current MLB league. I'm not experiencing the same lack of talent that is being mentioned. However, I do play with scouts at 100% accurate, so I see the actual ratings. Talent Change Randomness plays a big part in minor league players. After the first couple rounds there isn't much left, so I sort by categories and try to find players with something to work with (high contact, stuff, multiple positions, etc). I also sort by intelligence and work ethic. These attributes will factor into the kind of "boost" your prospects get. On the other side, 5-star prospects with low work ethic and intelligence are more likely to bust, so I stay away from them. Using this method, I've had many late round guys make the big leagues, and I've have a few end up in the HOF. I also dump a lot of money in development and try to find good coaches. I have no idea if that is helping or not, but its what I do.

07-08-2015, 10:53 PM	#12
SirMichaelJordan Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 2,627	2 1/2 star potential is considered a good prospect. Keep that in mind.

07-09-2015, 08:41 AM	#19
marc5477 Minors (Double A) Join Date: Nov 2014 Posts: 146	Just remember that depending on how you set up ratings, even if you did what you want, because there are more 4-5 star players being made, they will neutralize each other pushing their stats down in the long run. Said differently, if you boost everything then the net change will be nothing. Instead of having a superstar dominate mostly average pitchers, they will now face superstar pitchers left and right and their hitting will decline to what you currently consider average. This also applies to pitchers. Again it depends entirely on your league settings. This "epidemic of superstars" happened to me once when I started playing ootp a few years ago and I ended up having to delete that league and starting over. In the next league I turned all the PCM's down to about .75 to reduce the number of superstars being made. This was obviously fixed in Ootp16 because now it is much harder to develop superstars and that makes them more unique and valuable to have. Play how you like but be warned because it ruined one of my leagues in the past.

07-09-2015, 09:06 AM	#20
SirMichaelJordan Hall Of Famer Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 2,627	I think rather than bumping draft prospects ratings up from what they are at, scouting should be looked at instead. I play with the lowest setting of accuracy and the fog is still too little. Major league vets will have pretty much 0 fog and thats fine but when it comes to prospects (especially at draft time) the fog should be really thick but as of now the ratings are only off but a few (OSA might give a guy a 5 in power on a 2-8 scale while my poor scout may show 4 or 6) This is fine for the current rating but the fog of potential should be thicker giving the illusion of a decent draft. I think scouting in OOTP needs a bit of an overhaul and needs to be more immersive than what it is. Scouting the draft is really not necessary as of now.