It will be interesting to see how random.  In other words, how far down in the draft will we be able to expect an x% chance of getting y type player (e.g., stud, steady ML starter, good backup)?  I've not looked at past ML drafts to see what their standard distribution is roughly similar to how you (MikeT) did with the past first round draft(s).

Mark Beuhrle was a 38th round pick in 1998!

Just did a cursory review of past MLB drafts.  If the WIS draft were more like the MLB draft in randomness, it would frustrate a bunch of WIS users.  

Frustrating them is fine. Making them leave is not. Frustrated MLB owners have hundreds of millions of dollars on the line and can't walk away. We can. If a new owner comes in and has a bust at #1 while someone else gets a HOF at #523, the new owner says 'This is stupid" and walks away having wasted $5, never to help us fill worlds again. If a veteran owner takes on a rebuilding project and gets hosed in the draft, he finds another world and at most is out $25. If an already-strong division rival lucks intro a Buehrle, other teams in the division might decide the best option is to tank away to collect draft picks for a few seasons. We don't have TV ratings, ticket sales and concession profits as incentive to try to win 85 games instead of 56. 

Check a couple of HBD drafts from 9 seasons ago.   Here's the breakdown of players who played multiple BL seasons:

1st round and supplemental:  39 and 36
2nd round:  3 and 9
3rd round:  None
4th round:  1 and 1
7th round:  1(DITR)
10th round:  1(DITR)

So, in a given season, 44 and 48 players became multi-season BL players.    81.5% came out of the first round.    Without DITR, 2% came after the 2nd round.  I think the new system will produce more 2nd/3rd/4th round BL players and reduce the number of sure thing 1st rounders. 

 

What I'd like to see, since we know we're still getting 40-50 multi-season BL players out of each draft, is a much better distribution.    Maybe 20 from 1st/supplemental, meaning it's still a better than 50% success rate, 8-10 from the 2nd(30% success rate) and the rest from 3rd-5th with the occassional DITR making the 6th-15th still a possibility.

And I still wish they'd cut the draft off after 10-15 rounds and then let the undrafted players go into the tryout camp pool. 

Posted by MikeT23 on 8/30/2015 3:13:00 PM (view original):
What I'd like to see, since we know we're still getting 40-50 multi-season BL players out of each draft, is a much better distribution.    Maybe 20 from 1st/supplemental, meaning it's still a better than 50% success rate, 8-10 from the 2nd(30% success rate) and the rest from 3rd-5th with the occassional DITR making the 6th-15th still a possibility.

And I still wish they'd cut the draft off after 10-15 rounds and then let the undrafted players go into the tryout camp pool. 

I personally would like to see WIS raise the ante up as well. What I mean is I would like to see them add more BL caliber players every season. At 40-50 new players per season coming out of the draft that is only 1.5 players per team added to our talent pool. I realize that we probably must get 20-30 via IFA as well, but imo if we got maybe around 65 per season by the draft it would only help the competitive balance of most worlds. I see nothing wrong with seeing less AAA players on BL teams. Just my 02 cents for what its worth.

Meh.  In a world of 60s, 70 is king.  In a world of 80s, 70 is ****.    That said, if owners were still getting what they think is BL-quality in the 1st round, they'll ***** less when they still lose.

Two things:

1) in all the sim games I've played, owners always want better players. But it's the weaknesses which make gameplay high scoring, not the strengths. Someone's got to give up those base hits. If we all get better players, less happens. You get more 2-1 games. I stopped playing high cap sim leagues years ago for that reason.

2) I'm in two worlds right now and the disparity in quality of players is remarkable. Average SPs in one world would get crushed in the second. The first world sees big dollar free agents who would be average starters in the second. I'm sure all of you can tell similar stories.

How many IFAs are signed in MLB?  I would like them to increase the randomness of the draft with a distribution as Mike has suggested while reducing the number of IFAs available each season and adding the quality of those players to the draft.  This would make the draft more valuable and lead to increased funding of draft scouting and hopefully reduce the incentive to max prospect budget and tank.  Also, I think they should add value to advance scouting by giving a game performance boost in accordance with the amount budgeted.  It seems to me that advance scouting plays a role in trades in MLB, but also in how teams approach opposition pitchers/hitters.  So if a team maxed in ADV, they would have a trade advantage, but also a slight assist for in-game performance. 

My busted IFA budget is $10 million. I say no way this can be close.

Poker-- if every single one of your projections is 10 points high he's still a solid middle-of-the-pen major league reliever.  You can chase him relatively comfortably, knowing that he's pretty unlikely to totally bust.

This is just what Mike's been saying-- you go with your projections but expect to be disappointed.

Good point dedelman. I'll tell you one thing, it sure makes things tough with bidding...

Are the projected overall ratings more useful now despite the fuzzy individual ratings?  For example, is an overall of 75 still pretty much an overall of 75 but with scrambled individual ratings still adding up to that?  Or, is overall also off substantially like some individual ratings (e.g., a draft projected 75 is really a 62)?    

Bump. 18/2 College/HS budget and I have the #1 pick in the Show II. Got numbers for 238 players, about half and half. 

How fuzzy have the numbers at the top of the draft been with 18 mil scouting?