Anyone else getting extra thin draft pools?

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by thklein

Same pool with the ratings on the 20-80 scale. I get that no one is rated an 80 in most real life draft pools. How about a 70 or two? Maybe a few 60s. Heck, throw me a bone and give me a 55. This is not a realistic draft pool.

This is a fictional draft pool. It has nothing to do with the real draft pools I was talking about. So we're talking at cross purposes.

But the idea that any "realistic" draft pool has a 70 or two or a few 60's? Not true. See the following for the year's real life draft pool. Not a 60 to be found and only three guys at 50 or above. And yet some sources, for instance Perfect Game, say the following about it: "This draft is a very strong one, maybe not historically good, but very strong"

https://www.fangraphs.com/prospects/...rt=-1,1&type=0

[wallewalls]

Devs, please don't cave. Just because they're a 50 on draft day doesn't mean they're a 50 forever. Drill down and pick prospects based on tools that you feel will develop, you know, how they do it in real life. Or just bump the ratings up yourselves.

[Lukas Berger]

To add, folks have already discussed this earlier in the thread, but because a guy has a potential of say 55 at the time he's drafted in OOTP, that does not mean or imply that's his peak possibility.

Players will get talent boosts from the development engine regularly (as well as hits too) and many guys in the OOTP universe will end up far exceeding their "potential" at draft time once they're playing in the majors.

Potential in OOTP is not the highest a player can possibly get. It's more like a 50th percentile projection with guys able to go (far) over it, if they're lucky.

[Sin44]

Originally Posted by wallewalls

Devs, please don't cave. Just because they're a 50 on draft day doesn't mean they're a 50 forever. Drill down and pick prospects based on tools that you feel will develop, you know, how they do it in real life. Or just bump the ratings up yourselves.

Not asking Devs to cave, just maybe give us the option of changing this. So those of us who want the potential stars can get the potential stars and those of you who want to draft 2.5 stars with the #1 pick you can do that.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by Sin44

Not asking Devs to cave, just maybe give us the option of changing this. So those of us who want the potential stars can get the potential stars and those of you who want to draft 2.5 stars with the #1 pick you can do that.

This is OOTP, the game with more options than any other! Of course the option to change that is there already

Just boost your league's player creation modifiers. The higher you raise them, the more higher potential players you'll get, at least in fictional draft classes. This won't change the initial 2-3 classes in the MLB quickstart with real hand rated players. But you can always delete those and let the game generate fictional players based on your modified pcms if you like.

Now that's not to say say there are no side effects to boosting them. Boost them too high and you could create a league with too many good players, so even if lots of guys are 5* potentials, they never really stand out because everyone else is too good too. Basically a league with an overly flat talent distribution.

So doing something like this takes some balancing and testing and experimenting if you don't want to create unexpected side effects that really mess things up and leave you scratching your head at what you're seeing 20 years down the road in your league when half of your 400 5* rated players are hitting .200 with 10 HR's.

Talent change randomness is another setting to tweak as well. This won't result in visibly higher rated players but higher numbers here make things more volatile and players will gain or lose higher amounts of potential. Lower numbers make things more static and mean most players develop closer to their initial potential.

So with any major changes to the above, testing, simming and balancing is key. But it's perfectly doable and possible and totally up to you how good the players coming into your league look.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by thklein

Same pool with the ratings on the 20-80 scale. I get that no one is rated an 80 in most real life draft pools. How about a 70 or two? Maybe a few 60s. Heck, throw me a bone and give me a 55. This is not a realistic draft pool.

This is with very low scouting accuracy...

One is my scout and the other is OSA

[qcbandits]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

This is with very low scouting accuracy...

One is my scout and the other is OSA

You've answered your own question. Low scouting accuracy, you have no clue what their real ratings are. To judge the draft pools you need to look at them with scouting turned off

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by qcbandits

You've answered your own question. Low scouting accuracy, you have no clue what their real ratings are. To judge the draft pools you need to look at them with scouting turned off

That's the point...

Prospects are rated based on real-life examples. There aren't any multiple 80 potential prospects in a yearly draft let alone a 70.

If you want players to be over-hyped then you need to lower the game's scouting accuracy.

If you prefer to have NFL or NBA type of drafts then you need to change the PCM's.

If you want prospects to spend little to no time in the minors, then you need to raise the development rate.

The options are there.

[PSUColonel]

I think they may have caved a little.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by SirMichaelJordan

That's the point...

Prospects are rated based on real-life examples. There aren't any multiple 80 potential prospects in a yearly draft let alone a 70.

If you want players to be over-hyped then you need to lower the game's scouting accuracy.

If you prefer to have NFL or NBA type of drafts then you need to change the PCM's.

If you want prospects to spend little to no time in the minors, then you need to raise the development rate.

The options are there.

Yep, that's it exactly. We set things up to what we feel is the most realistic by default, and we've tested things to make sure leagues with out of the box settings turn out reasonably well over time.

But if you disagree with us as to what's "realistic" or even just what's fun? Then no problem. Just take a couple minutes and tweak the settings to how you want them and enjoy!

Like our motto was a few years ago, "it's your game, play it your way"

[PSUColonel]

Originally Posted by Lukas Berger

Yep, that's it exactly. We set things up to what we feel is the most realistic by default, and we've tested things to make sure leagues with out of the box settings turn out reasonably well over time.

But if you disagree with us as to what's "realistic" or even just what's fun? Then no problem. Just take a couple minutes and tweak the settings to how you want them and enjoy!

Like our motto was a few years ago, "it's your game, play it your way"

I am running build 34 now...and I am seeing an 80, a few 65 and a handful of 60. This wasn't the case previously.

[Lukas Berger]

Originally Posted by PSUColonel

I am running build 34 now...and I am seeing an 80, a few 65 and a handful of 60. This wasn't the case previously.

There were always a couple 60's and 65's. But a few more guys got a bit of a boost in the initial 2020 class a few days ago. The top guys were a little underrated compared to the ratings for the prospects already in milb. Might've overdone it a bit. Balancing this stuff is not as easy as it looks, especially when different sources give such different info.

A few have already been tweaked down a bit more though, and I'll take another look at this soon, when I get around to tweaking the whole class, and we'll see if the rest stay there or not.

[redranger]

I completely agree with Sweed. I think a lot of times it’s like not seeing the forest for the trees

To me a lot of the beauty is the dice roll and coming up with what you think a players strong pounts are and identifying his weaknesses with ones you may be able to develop

I know many like to roll through the draft quickly. Me personally, I like to try and study and dissect the information made available to me

It is very rewarding when you have that 6,8, or 10 round pick you felt like you took a chance on develop into an MLB all-Star


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[itsmb8]

Originally Posted by redranger

I completely agree with Sweed. I think a lot of times it’s like not seeing the forest for the trees

To me a lot of the beauty is the dice roll and coming up with what you think a players strong pounts are and identifying his weaknesses with ones you may be able to develop

I know many like to roll through the draft quickly. Me personally, I like to try and study and dissect the information made available to me

It is very rewarding when you have that 6,8, or 10 round pick you felt like you took a chance on develop into an MLB all-Star


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Also, it can happen whenever. If you use feeders, what if you draft a high schooler really late, maybe round 38. He doesnt sign, goes to a 4yr school, and 3 years later he's a top 10 pick and an MVP candidate for years with another team? Maybe youre actually the team that player is on?

Maybe you draft a high schooler REALLY high and he doesnt sign, and you get a comp pick. That kid goes to college and gets hurt every year, and by the time he would be drafted after his senior year, he's not even drafted?

Literally anything is possible in baseball AND OOTP. If people want high potential ratings just turn down scouting accuracy, its more fun that way anyways.

[Curve Ball Dave]

To the critique that guys don't "fast track" to the Majors, in my most recent season (second season played so far) I drafted a catcher 6th overall. He's torn up the low minors and I just promoted him to High A. He could go to AA if I felt like it but he's defensive skills need work. His ETA to the Majors is the next season and at this rate there's no reason why he won't. For every one of these guys I have had plenty of first round picks who take five years just to get an invite to Spring Training. That's how pro baseball is. OOTP is real to a fault, I hope they don't change a thing.

[greenOak]

I've seen a few players who fast track their way through the minors, but they sometimes they have peculiar progressions. I'll show some examples:

Julio Hernandez - 1st overall pick out of JUCO. Best player in the league right now, shows a somewhat typical path to the majors for a generational talent. First year in rookie ball. Starts his second year in A-ball, torches it for three weeks, gets called up to AA and continues to rake before getting a September call up. Starts his third year in the majors and puts up a 9 WAR season.

Jim Correa - 2nd overall pick out of college. In his draft year he starts in rookie ball before getting called up to short season A for a few games. Starts the next year in A-ball, then gets a September call up. Starts the next season in the big leagues. Didn't ever having play AA or AAA level.

Elijah Smith - 2nd overall out of HS. Goes straight to A ball out of high school and dominates. Starts his second year at A ball and dominates again. Gets called up to the majors the next season. Again without ever playing the AA or AAA level.

Players going from A-ball to the majors happens relatively frequently for me. I would guess that at least half of the guys who hit the big leagues before 21 have little to no experience at AA or AAA. In a lot of cases it appears to be the result of players staying in A-ball for what is in my opinion too long.

Also I'm not sure how to organize the pictures so if anyone could tell me that would be great.

[qcbandits]

Originally Posted by Curve Ball Dave

To the critique that guys don't "fast track" to the Majors, in my most recent season (second season played so far) I drafted a catcher 6th overall. He's torn up the low minors and I just promoted him to High A. He could go to AA it if I felt like but he's defensive skills need work. His ETA to the Majors is the next season and at this rate there's no reason why he won't. For every one of these guys I have had plenty of first round picks who take five years just to get an invite to Spring Training. That's how pro baseball is. OOTP is real to a fault, I hope they don't change a thing.

Yea I fast track as well and my guys sometimes do well for it and not so well other times... But I rarely see the AI do it. That's what I'm getting at. In real life you see at least 4 to 5 guys that you wouldn't expect, like guys drafted after the 20th round playing in full season ball by the end of their draft year. I've yet to see that for any team bit my own

[BIG17EASY]

I don't think people understand what a 50 is. A 50 is an average major league player. Asking for multiple players rated 70 in a draft is essentially asking for multiple players with Hall of Fame potential. That's not realistic.

[thklein]

If we're going for realism, a scout should be giving me a player's ceiling and the likelihood that they reach that ceiling. A player with a sky high ceiling but a low likelihood of reaching that ceiling might have the same overall rating as a player with a lower ceiling but a higher likelihood of reaching that ceiling. Maybe there is a way to dig into the numbers and figure this out on my own, but this isn't my job. I don't want to spend hours doing a deep dive into the ratings of 100 2.5 star potential draft prospects. Maybe others enjoy that, and that's fine. That's not fun for me. And I'm guessing it's not fun for most people.

Realism does not mean just giving me a glob of prospects with similar ratings with little to distinguish them. That's not realistic, and it's not fun.

These images are the draft pools from the same league, same season, same settings, same scout. The only difference is one is from the original OOTP 20 league and the other is from the exported OOTP 21 league. Which draft would be more fun to participate in? A change was made that makes the game less fun for most people.
And I never noticed an excess of good players in the OOTP 20 league.

But whatever. I'll just go with my scouting director recommendations and get on with my life.

[SirMichaelJordan]

Originally Posted by qcbandits

Yea I fast track as well and my guys sometimes do well for it and not so well other times... But I rarely see the AI do it. That's what I'm getting at. In real life you see at least 4 to 5 guys that you wouldn't expect, like guys drafted after the 20th round playing in full season ball by the end of their draft year. I've yet to see that for any team bit my own

The AI does it and it’s more prevalent when you set up service year limits.

Also if you want to see more break out stars from the later rounds, then raise talent randomness.