7/30/2013 11:52 AM
Funny how an Arlen thread turned into a pretty thoughtful discussion
7/30/2013 12:05 PM
Arlen stopped posting so that helped.
7/30/2013 4:33 PM
Posted by deathinahole on 7/29/2013 6:55:00 PM (view original):
It would sure as hell fix the people that don't give two ***** about their minors.
You would need a healthy and stocked AAA and AA, minimum, to get through a season.

Kind of like, oh, I don't know, MLB?
I agree.  It's too easy to not just get away with, but thrive without having a strong minor league system.
8/3/2013 5:00 PM
Biggest problem with HBD is the predictability. Look at the good teams, all filled with top 20 picks. There are no true DITR like a Piazza and there are no muffs like Steve Chilcott, both should exist.
8/8/2013 10:00 AM
Posted by daveymac on 8/3/2013 5:00:00 PM (view original):
Biggest problem with HBD is the predictability. Look at the good teams, all filled with top 20 picks. There are no true DITR like a Piazza and there are no muffs like Steve Chilcott, both should exist.

Agreed, tank while accumulating IFAs is a recipe for success. This in no way represents reality.  I would like to see teams rewarded for working on their rosters, paying attention to their minors, digging deep in the draft.  I don't have any suggestions off the top of my head, but a few have been mentioned in this thread.

8/8/2013 10:18 AM
Minimum win rules handle a lot of the issues involved with tanking. 
8/25/2013 9:31 AM (edited)
 Make one of the variables for IFA's and even FA the teams record over a 2 or 3 season span. It won't overly penalize a team that has a bad season but would keep tankers, even soft ones, from automatically getting the best players.
 
 Do the same with the draft picks maybe the top few players have a message along the lines of "I wont sign for a team that doesn't average 60 wins a year"
8/25/2013 9:34 AM
Posted by crickett13 on 8/25/2013 9:31:00 AM (view original):
 Make one of the variables for IFA's and even FA the teams record over a 2 or 3 season span. It won't overly penalize a team that has a bad season but would keep tankers, even soft ones, from automatically getting the best players.
 
 Do the same with the draft picks maybe the top few players have a message along the lines of "I wont sign for a team that doesn't average 60 wins a year"
Those are pretty good ideas, actually. It would also penalize new owners, but the penalty could be avoided by going conservative in the draft.
8/25/2013 9:41 AM
Posted by paul0613 on 8/8/2013 10:00:00 AM (view original):
Posted by daveymac on 8/3/2013 5:00:00 PM (view original):
Biggest problem with HBD is the predictability. Look at the good teams, all filled with top 20 picks. There are no true DITR like a Piazza and there are no muffs like Steve Chilcott, both should exist.

Agreed, tank while accumulating IFAs is a recipe for success. This in no way represents reality.  I would like to see teams rewarded for working on their rosters, paying attention to their minors, digging deep in the draft.  I don't have any suggestions off the top of my head, but a few have been mentioned in this thread.

MLB is starting to resemble HBD more and more, if not in the particulars of the rules, but in those rules' unintended consequences:
The nature of the latest CBA gives the worst teams in the game the most sizable advantage they have ever had in acquiring amateur talent ... To put it another way: There's not much of an incentive in the draft for a good team to be mediocre, or for a mediocre team to be bad. But there's a huge incentive for a bad team to be awful...

By tearing apart their roster last summer, the Astros guaranteed themselves the no. 1 pick again next month, and once again will have a significant spending advantage on every other team. Only this year, the advantage spreads to signing amateur talent on the international market as well ... At some point, the Astros will make a push to start winning games. But the longer they continue to suck, the longer they'll reap the advantages of draft resources that other teams don't have.
8/30/2013 7:12 PM
Posted by burnsy483 on 7/19/2013 10:46:00 AM (view original):
Not sure exactly what you're looking for, but I've said before that the moment that player development becomes unpredictable is the moment I stop allocating money to scouting and spend more money on free agents, where I actually know what I'm getting.
There is nothing wrong with this. HBD should have more teams fighting in free agency rather than the 10 playoff teams every year.

Also, you then have value in scouting and coaching if teams want to develop talent that way.

I say grey out all of the stats and create a more general mask to rankings where a guy might have 1-3 stars in each stat which represent projected growth rate. ALl of a sudden you got teams caring about their 1st round picks and supplemental rounds.
9/1/2013 11:16 PM
There's plenty wrong with this. Its bingo.
If I want to play bingo, I'll play bingo. If I want to play a strategy game where the more you research the better your reward, then I'll take projections that mean something.
9/2/2013 7:04 AM
I've long supported projections be a on a scale of 1-6 or 1-8 as opposed to 0-100.     As I've said, on a 1-6 scale, a 6 could be anywhere from 85-100 and so on.    The bonus of doing this would be twofold.  
1.  ADV would be more important.    The difference between a 5 and a 6 could be 30+ points. 
2.  We'd kill the "None of my guys reach their projections!!!" whining.

9/2/2013 7:11 AM
Posted by paul0613 on 8/8/2013 10:00:00 AM (view original):
Posted by daveymac on 8/3/2013 5:00:00 PM (view original):
Biggest problem with HBD is the predictability. Look at the good teams, all filled with top 20 picks. There are no true DITR like a Piazza and there are no muffs like Steve Chilcott, both should exist.

Agreed, tank while accumulating IFAs is a recipe for success. This in no way represents reality.  I would like to see teams rewarded for working on their rosters, paying attention to their minors, digging deep in the draft.  I don't have any suggestions off the top of my head, but a few have been mentioned in this thread.

I would love to dig deeper in drafts, but the current system is so NOT user friendly for this. I have neither the technical ability nor the time to prepare excel spreadsheets like a lot of people do and I wind up simply ranking about 20 guys before I give up -- largely because its so burdensome to do so . . .
of 3

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

Popular on WhatIfSports site: Baseball Simulation | College Basketball Game | College Football Game | Online Baseball Game | Hockey Simulation | NFL Picks | College Football Picks | Sports Games

© 1999-2014 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.