Anyone else getting extra thin draft pools?

[naturaldopamine]

I have been through 4 seasons now and I have yet to find one single player who is rated above 55 potential in the rookie draft. Why is this? I have $24 million pumped into my scouting budget and I have the best scout in the game. Every year after May 4 I request scouting reports from every player & by draft day everybody is at ‘very high’ accuracy yet all of them are average at best.

Why is the draft pool so thin? It has taken all of the fun out of the draft and in year 4 I actually simulated the entire thing because the best player available was 45 potential. Where are the 70-80 potential guys? Same problem with the international free agents. Hardly any IFA’s above 30-35 potential.... I must be missing something.

[ZenMaster61]

Same here. I lucked out and got a highly favors tools scout that has a legendary rating in amateurs and minors, and outstanding in majors and international. The first few years the best draft prospects were 2.5 star potential, then I saw one 5 star in the fourth year, and one 4 star in the next two seasons after that. The international amateurs were really bad also until the fourth and fifth year when I saw a couple of 4.5 stars.

I really like building through the draft, so this makes the game significantly less fun for me. Also, it seems like the real life players are lasting forever because there aren't any hot shot rookies in the league to push them out.

[wallewalls]

I actually like it like this. It's more lifelike, in my opinion. Outside of maybe the top-5 picks in a real life draft, none of the rest of the first round are considered top prospects right away. It's up to the team to develop them into top prospects.

[naturaldopamine]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

I actually like it like this. It's more lifelike, in my opinion. Outside of maybe the top-5 picks in a real life draft, none of the rest of the first round are considered top prospects right away. It's up to the team to develop them into top prospects.

It’s realistic that hardly anybody has any potential whatsoever? Having only 2-3 above average players over the course of 4 years is not realistic in the least.

Is there a way to mod this and make it more realistic? Maybe there’s a setting I’m missing where the game will automatically add double or triple the amount of kids in the pool.

[naturaldopamine]

I’ve never been the tanking kind of guy, but I understand people who like to rebuild by tanking. However this year it isn’t wise. It would suck to sell off your entire team for a total rebuild and tank only to realize that the #1 draft pick you’re after is a 45 potential player lol

[wallewalls]

Take a look at the 2014 draft. There's exactly three All-Stars from the first round. I count a total of six players who are still relevant nearly six years later. Do you want the entire first round to turn out to be stars?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_M...Baseball_draft

[Curve Ball Dave]

The "thin draft pool" talk comes up over and over and over again. For the umpteenth time, you don't know how good or bad a draft pool really is for several seasons.

[SirMichaelJordan]

55 potential is an above average player.

[Lukas Berger]

We rate the draft prospects to fit in seamlessly with the matrix used for the players and prospects already in the roster set and to match the talent distribution you see in the real draft.

Look at the ratings of players in the real draft on sites like MLB Pipeline and Fangraphs and then compare those to the top prospects on their lists (where you won't see anyone graded as an 80 overall potential btw, except Franco on fangraphs. In the draft, pipeline has 3 guys rated 60 overall, fangraphs has none). Then do the same in OOTP.

You'll see that most drafts will have one, maybe two guys that rate in the top 10 prospects immediately.

Having a bunch of 80 potential draft picks in each draft when we only only have something like 30 guys with 80 potential in all of the whole MLB roster set (probably only half or so of whom ever came through the draft), including current MLBers, would be overkill and completely unrealistic.

This is for the first 3 years btw, where we include and rate the real players for those drafts. Starting year four, you get the dev engine creating fictional players.

[stealofhome]

One of the disappointing things about OOTP's attempts for realism is what real really means. It's the same thing with injuries which seem to happen way too often and then you remember Christian Yelich breaking his foot on a foul tip right before the playoffs.

It would be nice to have an analysis of OOTP vs real life prominent on the site though, it would be a good place to point questions about these topics.

[naturaldopamine]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

Take a look at the 2014 draft. There's exactly three All-Stars from the first round. I count a total of six players who are still relevant nearly six years later. Do you want the entire first round to turn out to be stars?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_M...Baseball_draft

I think this proves my point perfectly. A lot of those guys had a TON of potential and were overly-hyped up! And a lot of them still are. Every draft should have a couple 70-80 potential guys with a lot of hype. And several 60 prospects. Blaze Jordan shouldn't be a 45 potential player. I've been through four complete drafts & my scout has yet to find a player above 60.

[wallewalls]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

We rate the draft prospects to fit in seamlessly with the matrix used for the players and prospects already in the roster set and to match the talent distribution you see in the real draft.

Look at the ratings of players in the real draft on sites like MLB Pipeline and Fangraphs and then compare those to the top prospects on their lists (where you won't see anyone graded as an 80 overall potential btw, except Franco on fangrpahs. In the draft, pipeline has 3 guys rated 60 overall, fangraphs has none). Then do the same in OOTP.

You'll see that most drafts will have one, maybe two guys that rate in the top 10 prospects immediately.

Having a bunch of 80 potential draft picks in each draft when we only only have something like 30 guys with 80 potential in all of the whole MLB roster set (probably only half or so of whom ever came through the draft), including current MLBers, would be overkill and completely unrealistic.

This is for the first 3 years btw, where we include and rate the real players for those drafts. Starting year four, you get the dev engine creating fictional players.

Absolutely how it should be

[wallewalls]

Originally Posted by naturaldopamine

I think this proves my point perfectly. A lot of those guys had a TON of potential and were overly-hyped up! And a lot of them still are. Every draft should have a couple 70-80 potential guys with a lot of hype. And several 60 prospects. Blaze Jordan shouldn't be a 45 potential player. I've been through four complete drafts & my scout has yet to find a player above 60.

Absolutely not. Blaze Jordan isn't even considered a top prospect in this year's draft. And as Lukas showed with an earlier post, it's extremely rare for prospects outside of the top-five to go right into the top 100 list. I think OOTP gets this right. 70-80 potential guys right out the gate should be extremely rare, saved for only a handful of guys in the entire league: The Trouts, the Bellingers, the Yelichs for hitters. The Coles, deGroms, and the Scherzers for pitchers. Maybe five of each for hitters and pitchers. There shouldn't be five of those guys in each draft class.

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by naturaldopamine

I think this proves my point perfectly. A lot of those guys had a TON of potential and were overly-hyped up! And a lot of them still are. Every draft should have a couple 70-80 potential guys with a lot of hype. And several 60 prospects. Blaze Jordan shouldn't be a 45 potential player. I've been through four complete drafts & my scout has yet to find a player above 60.

Look at the OSA projections, and that’s just what you will see....OSA is the “hype”. Your scout is a bit more realistic...he also may not be a “tools” type scout.

[qcbandits]

Originally Posted by naturaldopamine

It’s realistic that hardly anybody has any potential whatsoever? Having only 2-3 above average players over the course of 4 years is not realistic in the least.

Is there a way to mod this and make it more realistic? Maybe there’s a setting I’m missing where the game will automatically add double or triple the amount of kids in the pool.

How can something be more realistic than real world? The real life draft has few 4 and 5 star guys. 3 star is a very solid big leaguer and there are plenty of those in the draft classes

[Giants44]

I have done ZERO actual analysis on this (I know OOTP does and other users probably have as well) But the anecdotal evidence from my first few v21 seasons is that there does seem to be less potential then in the past - some of this could be very much as designed because the OWA still rates many players higher. It is my "outstanding" scout and the ability to now scout year round and not just for 30 days that leads my organization to know they have lower potential.

I think what is missing from the discussion is the player POTENTIAL not what they turn out to be.

While I agree that historically most drafts only turn out a few outstanding players - when drafted most teams think the top guys have tremendous potential.

a better reflection would be 10-15 players in each pool who are potential 70+ ( I hate star ratings) but only a few actually reach that potential.

[Curve Ball Dave]

Originally Posted by qcbandits

How can something be more realistic than real world? The real life draft has few 4 and 5 star guys. 3 star is a very solid big leaguer and there are plenty of those in the draft classes

And that 3 star guy can develop into a 5 star guy over time. Too many players of OOTP don't understand how the MLB draft and player development actually works in real life and want instant gratification. The reality is any player who makes to the Majors is a success story, and very few actually do make it that far.

[koohead]

Can anyone that runs a fictional league share how their pool looks years 1-3?

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Giants44

I have done ZERO actual analysis on this (I know OOTP does and other users probably have as well) But the anecdotal evidence from my first few v21 seasons is that there does seem to be less potential then in the past - some of this could be very much as designed because the OWA still rates many players higher. It is my "outstanding" scout and the ability to now scout year round and not just for 30 days that leads my organization to know they have lower potential.

I think what is missing from the discussion is the player POTENTIAL not what they turn out to be.

While I agree that historically most drafts only turn out a few outstanding players - when drafted most teams think the top guys have tremendous potential.

a better reflection would be 10-15 players in each pool who are potential 70+ ( I hate star ratings) but only a few actually reach that potential.

This would absolutely NOT be realistic at all. You are talking about what some consider to be “fun factor” not realism.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Lower your game scouting accuracy in the settings and you will see the “hype”

Especially with OSA...