Poor talent in recent Draft Years - Page 2

JMDurron · 05-10-2013, 11:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Righty Groove

So I started a new league, from scratch, not converted from 13. Got the same results. I tried contacting Markus, and got this:

I would have to say I respecfully disagree. You just need to follow the draft to know, if every player projected to be an ace/all-star became one, every team would be loaded. Every draft is full of youngsters oozing potential. Of course, reality is grim and few reach those heights. I thought the game moddeled that well...

Yeah, I have to disagree with that response as well. I liked the idea of potential future stars flaming out into useful players, roster filler, or outright AAA depth/failures and find it far more realistic than the "Everyone is mediocre, but a few will surprise you!" model that seems to have been adopted.

I'd be very hesitant to mess with the PCMs, though, because if the new model maintains potential ratings more consistently, and players apply the mods to make the draft classes look like they used to, then the star quotient in the leagues once those players develop might be extremely skewed, since fewer flameouts are now a part of the development model.

Righty Groove · 05-10-2013, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMDurron

I'd be very hesitant to mess with the PCMs, though, because if the new model maintains potential ratings more consistently, and players apply the mods to make the draft classes look like they used to, then the star quotient in the leagues once those players develop might be extremely skewed, since fewer flameouts are now a part of the development model.

Yeah, that would be my rationale for now too, for not messing around with PCMs. I guess I'll take a few years, see how it goes, and hope for the best.

But I'm certainly disapointed.

The Wolf · 05-11-2013, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JMDurron

Yeah, I have to disagree with that response as well. I liked the idea of potential future stars flaming out into useful players, roster filler, or outright AAA depth/failures and find it far more realistic than the "Everyone is mediocre, but a few will surprise you!" model

Exactly. Now it doesn't seem to matter who you draft after the 2nd or 3rd round.

goalieump413 · 05-11-2013, 12:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Righty Groove

...I would have to say I respecfully disagree. You just need to follow the draft to know, if every player projected to be an ace/all-star became one, every team would be loaded. Every draft is full of youngsters oozing potential. Of course, reality is grim and few reach those heights. I thought the game moddeled that well...

I think it's a lot more realistic for young players look promising at first but ultimately hit their peak too soon and fail to live up to their potential. Baseball is filled with innumerable names of guys that never quite figured it out. Only on those rare occasions will a 5 star kid truly become an All-Star, so it's more precious when your scout finds him.

Since this year's game is taking the opposite tack, it's almost like all 32 scouting directors are colluding to downplay the potential of every wide-eyed kid in the game. Too bad...

Righty Groove · 05-11-2013, 11:27 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Righty Groove

Yeah, that would be my rationale for now too, for not messing around with PCMs. I guess I'll take a few years, see how it goes, and hope for the best.

But I'm certainly disapointed.

It's a small sample and doesn't prove much, but at least shows it still happens...

Of my recent draft (my 1st in OOTP14), there were 2 top pitchers avaible.

One of them, within less then a year (before even the next draft came around) went from Stuff:Movement:Control 65:65:65 to 50:60:60 (I have scouting at 100%).

The other regressed little, went from 65:65:70 to 65:65:65.

So, well, at least it still can happen. There were no injuries involved, for what it's worth.

tejdog1 · 05-11-2013, 11:48 AM

So I guess my whole issue with the game and the "problems" I'm seeing... are in fact intended and aren't "problems" after all?

Righty Groove · 05-11-2013, 12:02 PM

This is really frustrating. I've been playing my saved game since ootp10, and I'm regretting having converted to 14. If I had not played almost two seasons already, I wouldn't think twice about coming back, all because of this crap new draft pool creation.

I don't feel optimistic about messing around with PCM, on the odd chance that it works, thinking it will take AT LEAST 5 seasons or so to see if it works. It may not. What do I do, then? Come back to ootp13 after 5-7 seasons? As if it never happened?

I'm very attached to my saved game, and I believe I'm not alone. It's very, very frustrating seeing your hard-earned dynasty messed up like that.

It's ridiculous, but I even tried "converting back" my OOTP14 save to ootp13. Of course it didn't work, but I tried...

endgame · 05-11-2013, 12:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Righty Groove

This is really frustrating. I've been playing my saved game since ootp10, and I'm regretting having converted to 14. If I had not played almost two seasons already, I wouldn't think twice about coming back, all because of this crap new draft pool creation.

I don't feel optimistic about messing around with PCM, on the odd chance that it works, thinking it will take AT LEAST 5 seasons or so to see if it works. It may not. What do I do, then? Come back to ootp13 after 5-7 seasons? As if it never happened?

I'm very attached to my saved game, and I believe I'm not alone. It's very, very frustrating seeing your hard-earned dynasty messed up like that.

It's ridiculous, but I even tried "converting back" my OOTP14 save to ootp13. Of course it didn't work, but I tried...

Well, no swaying opinion, you're entitled. But as for experiment's sake, if you're inclined, you might investigate the Create Player function (with whatever PCMs you may elect to try) and poof one out eligible for the draft and see what he looks like at random. Maybe try a half dozen or more. That'll give you a feel for what you're after. Maybe.

Righty Groove · 05-11-2013, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by endgame

Well, no swaying opinion, you're entitled. But as for experiment's sake, if you're inclined, you might investigate the Create Player function (with whatever PCMs you may elect to try) and poof one out eligible for the draft and see what he looks like at random. Maybe try a half dozen or more. That'll give you a feel for what you're after. Maybe.

I appreciate your response, and it may be worthwhile, yes.

I didn't even had OOTP13 installed anymore, but I did yesterday. Right now, I can't even bring myself to play either version.

Sorry for the rant-like posts.

HH20xx convert · 05-11-2013, 02:30 PM

When newbies and grizzled veterans both have problems with a new feature, it is time for the OOTP brain trust to revisit the changes made. As implemented right now, the draft pool generation 'fix' is far worse than the minor problem it was intended to solve....

TNCubsFan · 05-11-2013, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HH20xx convert

When newbies and grizzled veterans both have problems with a new feature, it is time for the OOTP brain trust to revisit the changes made. As implemented right now, the draft pool generation 'fix' is far worse than the minor problem it was intended to solve....

I disagree. The issue is that you have to change your thinking on the problem. Much like when Copernicus proved the Earth wasnt the center of the universe. How many 5 star studs are in a draft in any one year. Compare that to all the 3rd and 4th round pics who fizzle and 15th rounders who become solid #3 and 4 starters.

I find I am having to take a much longer view of the draft pool now and drafting more projection guys than guarantees in the third round so far. My biggest success so far is drafting a 18 yo 1b who is marginal as a position player. But as soon as I drafted him, because I had to dig a bit, I converted adn locked him as a SP and now I have a guy that is the 88th best prospect in baseball three years later.

Unless you are a draft junky who is any team going to take in the 3rd, 5th, or 15th round? What sort of guarantees will one get? IMO Markus adn Co have taken the right direction in this.

HH20xx convert · 05-11-2013, 04:46 PM

[QUOTE=TNCubsFan;3501896]I disagree. The issue is that you have to change your thinking on the problem. Much like when Copernicus proved the Earth wasnt the center of the universe. How many 5 star studs are in a draft in any one year. Compare that to all the 3rd and 4th round pics who fizzle and 15th rounders who become solid #3 and 4 starters.

I have no problem with developing gems from the later rounds, and I understand that is what Markus and Co. were shooting for. The problem as I see it is the lack of prospects that project as great players when drafted. Sure, many of them will fizzle, but it is not realistic to have just a few projected studs in every single draft class, which is what OOTP 14 is generating right now.

byzeil · 05-11-2013, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HH20xx convert

Sure, many of them will fizzle, but it is not realistic to have just a few projected studs in every single draft class, which is what OOTP 14 is generating right now.

I am still on the fence with v14 and the draft pool but I do have to wonder IRL how many "projected studs" are in any draft class? Harper, Strausburg? sure but, and I'm not a big daftnik, I don't think there are many projected 5 star prospects hanging around outside the top of the first round.

Edit: I've done numerous 30 year sims (using feeders) and so far have seen the talent be pretty consistent. I have not seen a lack of good young players coming up. Now I haven't been watching scouts projections of the draft classes but the talent seems to be there. Seems that if there is a problem it isn't how good of prospect are populating the draft class rather it is how the scouts are seeing them. Is the real problem the scouts? How about looking at draft classes with scouting off and seeing how the talent looks? (which I am no doing in my league)

Righty Groove · 05-11-2013, 05:42 PM

I'm always using scouts off, to eliminate this variable. It's not scouts.

And yes, it's not a PROBLEM. It's just not realistic. There shouldn't be several studs in every draft, but it shouldn't be 99% garbage either.

Follow the draft, and see how many "future ace" and "future all-star" you get. Plenty! In ootp14, it's not about 3rd round, or 15th round. It's mid-to-late 1st round is nothing but garbage!

I can't find a hitter with contact potential above 50 (20-80) after the top10 anymore. I used to. Some would fizzle, some would improve, some would reach the potential, and that's how it should be!

TNCubsFan · 05-11-2013, 05:43 PM

How many studs are in this years draft class? I mean no miss guaranteed studs. What about last years draft class?

Look at 2011 when Trevor Bauer was taken 1.3 by the D backs. Tell me that some organizations didnt think he was TOR quality, and some thought he was posting numbers based on level of competition.

2010 had Harper and Machado taken 1.1 and 1.3. Tallion at 1.2 is looking to be a good pitcher but with some questions if he will be that #1 stud. Matt Harvey went 1.7 and I will say sample size for now. Chris Sale was taken at 1.13, dont you think the Astros would have taken him rather than Delino Deshields Jr at 1.8, or KC at 1.4 instead of a SS who is still not convinced everyone his hit tools will play at the ML level. Oh, and the Cubs pick at 1.16 that year was released at the end of ST this year.

2009 is quite an interesting review. Strasberg at 1.1 and then hello TJS. Dustin Ackley at 1.2 was supposed to be a stud. Mike Minor at 1.7 was soundly criticized at the time as a major overdraft. The Braves saw something there and have a very solid 90+ Lefty who is cost controlled for 4 more years sitting anywhere from 2 to 4 in the rotation. What team from 1.2 to 1.6 hasnt thought shoulda, woulda, coulda? Mike Trout was taken at 1.25...

Go back to my first post in this thread. Looking at the draft pools with a scout set up in commissioner mode so I could make the scout from each end of the spectrum,then OSA scouting I am seeing alot of different opinions on alot of players. There are some consensus quality players. There is a player that I see that everyone agrees with for the top 3 to 5 players. After that different scouting views are giving different ratings.

Just like in my coaching days when you would have the Tools guy show up with the national cross checker who was a Talent guy, and a regional supervisor who was a "ripper". You could have three different conversations about the same player before they left town.

Go to the Hall of Fame website and look at the scouting reports on some of the players there. No scout stays employed long sending in reports telling the front office how this guy is going to be the second coming of Mickey Mantle, Ted Williams, or Cy Young then have them bust, bust, and bust. They stay employed by marginalizing players and happily chirping about the consensus #1 and 2 picks. That way the defense is if they bust, "well everyone else thought they would be good too", while the 26th round guy who makes the bullpen is the guy they put on their resumes.

Righty Groove · 05-11-2013, 05:43 PM

And if someone asks me: yes, I think OOTP should revert it. It probably won't.

byzeil · 05-11-2013, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Righty Groove

And yes, it's not a PROBLEM. It's just not realistic. There shouldn't be several studs in every draft, but it shouldn't be 99% garbage either.

You are right it should not be 99% garbage but that isn't what I'm seeing based on my league over a 30 year period. There is significant talent coming out of the draft and feeding the league. I am going to spend some time looking at my drafts over the years to see how things look.

Righty Groove · 05-11-2013, 05:55 PM

I do indeed believe you that, yes, at the long run the talent throughout the league is mantained. I just think this takes all the enjoyment and a severe chunk of realism from the draft.

As an aside: I do believe that, when combining scout findings, Int Amateur FAs and the draft pool, there is enough talent coming into the league to keep a steady level of all-stars, average players and ML-level scrubs.

It's the road to that I'm questioning.

byzeil · 05-11-2013, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Righty Groove

I can't find a hitter with contact potential above 50 (20-80) after the top10 anymore. I used to. Some would fizzle, some would improve, some would reach the potential, and that's how it should be!

Looking at my current draft class, scouting off and 20/80 scale, and I have 25 hitters with at least a 50 potential in CON, 15 of them are 50 potentials.

HH20xx convert · 05-11-2013, 06:03 PM

There are two issues being discussed in this thread regarding the draft classes:

1- The amount of talent in the draft pool.

2- The amount of talent projected by the scouts in the draft pool.

It is the second issue that is the problem. Right now, scouts' projections are unrealistically low. Therefore, in search of more undiscovered gems late in the draft, the frequency of studs who flame out has been drastically reduced. It seems to me these two goals should not be mutually exclusive. I would be much happier with both more late draft gems who develop and eagerly drafted 'stars' who never make it.

I very much hope the brain trust tweaks this.

05-11-2013, 11:48 AM	#26
tejdog1 All Star Starter Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Danbury, CT Posts: 1,618	So I guess my whole issue with the game and the "problems" I'm seeing... are in fact intended and aren't "problems" after all? __________________ It's amazing How you make your face just like a wall How you take your heart and turn it off How I turn my head and lose it all And it's unnerving How just one move puts me by myself There you go just trusting someone else Now I know I put us both through hell ~Matchbox 20, "Leave" Everyone knows it's spelled "TRAID", not trade

05-11-2013, 12:02 PM	#27
Righty Groove Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 262	This is really frustrating. I've been playing my saved game since ootp10, and I'm regretting having converted to 14. If I had not played almost two seasons already, I wouldn't think twice about coming back, all because of this crap new draft pool creation. I don't feel optimistic about messing around with PCM, on the odd chance that it works, thinking it will take AT LEAST 5 seasons or so to see if it works. It may not. What do I do, then? Come back to ootp13 after 5-7 seasons? As if it never happened? I'm very attached to my saved game, and I believe I'm not alone. It's very, very frustrating seeing your hard-earned dynasty messed up like that. It's ridiculous, but I even tried "converting back" my OOTP14 save to ootp13. Of course it didn't work, but I tried... Last edited by Righty Groove; 05-11-2013 at 12:06 PM.

05-11-2013, 05:43 PM	#35
TNCubsFan Major Leagues Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 300	How many studs are in this years draft class? I mean no miss guaranteed studs. What about last years draft class? Look at 2011 when Trevor Bauer was taken 1.3 by the D backs. Tell me that some organizations didnt think he was TOR quality, and some thought he was posting numbers based on level of competition. 2010 had Harper and Machado taken 1.1 and 1.3. Tallion at 1.2 is looking to be a good pitcher but with some questions if he will be that #1 stud. Matt Harvey went 1.7 and I will say sample size for now. Chris Sale was taken at 1.13, dont you think the Astros would have taken him rather than Delino Deshields Jr at 1.8, or KC at 1.4 instead of a SS who is still not convinced everyone his hit tools will play at the ML level. Oh, and the Cubs pick at 1.16 that year was released at the end of ST this year. 2009 is quite an interesting review. Strasberg at 1.1 and then hello TJS. Dustin Ackley at 1.2 was supposed to be a stud. Mike Minor at 1.7 was soundly criticized at the time as a major overdraft. The Braves saw something there and have a very solid 90+ Lefty who is cost controlled for 4 more years sitting anywhere from 2 to 4 in the rotation. What team from 1.2 to 1.6 hasnt thought shoulda, woulda, coulda? Mike Trout was taken at 1.25... Go back to my first post in this thread. Looking at the draft pools with a scout set up in commissioner mode so I could make the scout from each end of the spectrum,then OSA scouting I am seeing alot of different opinions on alot of players. There are some consensus quality players. There is a player that I see that everyone agrees with for the top 3 to 5 players. After that different scouting views are giving different ratings. Just like in my coaching days when you would have the Tools guy show up with the national cross checker who was a Talent guy, and a regional supervisor who was a "ripper". You could have three different conversations about the same player before they left town. Go to the Hall of Fame website and look at the scouting reports on some of the players there. No scout stays employed long sending in reports telling the front office how this guy is going to be the second coming of Mickey Mantle, Ted Williams, or Cy Young then have them bust, bust, and bust. They stay employed by marginalizing players and happily chirping about the consensus #1 and 2 picks. That way the defense is if they bust, "well everyone else thought they would be good too", while the 26th round guy who makes the bullpen is the guy they put on their resumes. __________________ "If a tie is like kissing your sister, losing is like kissing your grandmother with her teeth out" George Brett HOF

05-11-2013, 05:55 PM	#38
Righty Groove Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 262	I do indeed believe you that, yes, at the long run the talent throughout the league is mantained. I just think this takes all the enjoyment and a severe chunk of realism from the draft. As an aside: I do believe that, when combining scout findings, Int Amateur FAs and the draft pool, there is enough talent coming into the league to keep a steady level of all-stars, average players and ML-level scrubs. It's the road to that I'm questioning. Last edited by Righty Groove; 05-11-2013 at 05:59 PM.

05-11-2013, 02:30 PM	#30
HH20xx convert Minors (Triple A) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 225	When newbies and grizzled veterans both have problems with a new feature, it is time for the OOTP brain trust to revisit the changes made. As implemented right now, the draft pool generation 'fix' is far worse than the minor problem it was intended to solve....

05-11-2013, 04:46 PM	#32
HH20xx convert Minors (Triple A) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 225	[QUOTE=TNCubsFan;3501896]I disagree. The issue is that you have to change your thinking on the problem. Much like when Copernicus proved the Earth wasnt the center of the universe. How many 5 star studs are in a draft in any one year. Compare that to all the 3rd and 4th round pics who fizzle and 15th rounders who become solid #3 and 4 starters. I have no problem with developing gems from the later rounds, and I understand that is what Markus and Co. were shooting for. The problem as I see it is the lack of prospects that project as great players when drafted. Sure, many of them will fizzle, but it is not realistic to have just a few projected studs in every single draft class, which is what OOTP 14 is generating right now.

05-11-2013, 05:42 PM	#34
Righty Groove Minors (Triple A) Join Date: Apr 2012 Posts: 262	I'm always using scouts off, to eliminate this variable. It's not scouts. And yes, it's not a PROBLEM. It's just not realistic. There shouldn't be several studs in every draft, but it shouldn't be 99% garbage either. Follow the draft, and see how many "future ace" and "future all-star" you get. Plenty! In ootp14, it's not about 3rd round, or 15th round. It's mid-to-late 1st round is nothing but garbage! I can't find a hitter with contact potential above 50 (20-80) after the top10 anymore. I used to. Some would fizzle, some would improve, some would reach the potential, and that's how it should be!

05-11-2013, 06:03 PM	#40
HH20xx convert Minors (Triple A) Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 225	There are two issues being discussed in this thread regarding the draft classes: 1- The amount of talent in the draft pool. 2- The amount of talent projected by the scouts in the draft pool. It is the second issue that is the problem. Right now, scouts' projections are unrealistically low. Therefore, in search of more undiscovered gems late in the draft, the frequency of studs who flame out has been drastically reduced. It seems to me these two goals should not be mutually exclusive. I would be much happier with both more late draft gems who develop and eagerly drafted 'stars' who never make it. I very much hope the brain trust tweaks this.