Posted by mchales_army on 5/8/2015 9:34:00 AM (view original):
Funny that a lot of the people who are citing $ figures about how many seasons it'll cost them to "catch up" didn't mind spending $100 plus tanking for 4 or more seasons.

^^. Winner

With new development patterns it would be nice to see projected ratings no matter the age of the player. Then ADV becomes more important to see if a guy may be a late bloomer or even may decline.

  That would make me consider moving off 0.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/8/2015 7:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by rhyno026 on 5/8/2015 2:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by joshkvt on 5/7/2015 8:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rhyno026 on 5/7/2015 7:48:00 PM (view original):
My two cents: I hate the proposed changes to the amateur draft system. When a professional team scouts a player they gain a firm understanding of the players current skill level. For us to scout and not be able to see current ratings is unrealistic. When I finish playing through the seasons I've already purchased I don't believe I'll be purchasing more.

Comparing this to RL doesn't work. Professional teams' scouts are wrong about players' current ability all the time. Because this is a game based on ratings as opposed to RL skills, a player's current rating is accurate. A scout's take on how an LSU junior hits a curveball is not always accurate, and less likely to be accurate for a HS power hitter. There are first-round picks who never get out of A ball; that would never happen if RL teams always have a firm understanding of current skill level. It's more unrealistic that as the game works now we all see the same, 100% accurate current ratings.

The purpose of the change is not to mirror real life but to introduce ways to make ADV important. Getting rid of current ratings for other teams' players accomplishes that to some degree.

I'd argue that professional scouts are very rarely wrong about a player's current skill level, unless of course they're somewhat inept at their job. Either a player can presently range to his left or he can't, he can hit a curve or he can't, he can frame a pitch or he can't... these are things a trained eye can see. Good scouts aren't going to evaluate these types of things incorrectly. They may however mistakenly misjudge a player's potential to learn and improve, which more often than not is when you see a 1st round pick fail to ascend above A ball.

That's why not being able to view any type of current rating is unrealistic. If the goal is to eliminate the predictability of prospect development, change the development patterns and "fuzzy" up the projections. That stuff doesn't bother me because it still somewhat mirrors real life. Sacrificing realism (things a scout could see from the stands) in an effort to make advance scouting more "important" seems a bit excessive, and will cheapen the game for me at least.

I realize some folks aren't going to share the same opinion, and that's fine. I just figured I'd have my voice be heard.

I assume you'd be unhappy if a HBD HS player's "current" reflected what they'd be at the BL level.    Essentially, you take a good HS prospect and put him on the mound or at the plate.    Almost all get destroyed in real life.     So every HS split/contact/eye would be in the 20s/30s as those are "learned" skills.    Would that be helpful?  I don't think so.

You should never assume because it's true what they say...

At any rate, this is precisely the one aspect I strongly want them to keep. For the sake of argument let's say we're looking at a LH hitting 23 year old SS prospect with a current contact rating of 60, a left split of 35, a right split of 68 and an eye of 60. Let's say his defensive ratings are also decently strong, if not a bit below average at this point. Now no one knows in real life how a player is going to progress, and I don't have a problem if the game designers want to make it harder to decipher that on here. At this very moment though if I could use a 2B on my big league club I can look at this guy and ascertain that he'd at least be capable of holding down the job defensively, but I'll see some struggles from him against LH pitching. Is that helpful? Plenty.

If I spend 20 million in college scouting and can only see a bunch of "fuzzy" projections I have no way of knowing if the guy's going to be any help now. My scout might have been "watching him", and he came back to me with all these nifty projections, but somehow he couldn't tell me if the kid could make contact now? Is that realistic? No. Is that helpful? No.

Posted by crickett13 on 5/8/2015 10:10:00 AM (view original):
With new development patterns it would be nice to see projected ratings no matter the age of the player. Then ADV becomes more important to see if a guy may be a late bloomer or even may decline.

  That would make me consider moving off 0.

Projected for when? When a 35 yr old is 40? I'm more interested in what he'd look like at the end of a three year deal.

Posted by cbriese on 5/8/2015 10:23:00 AM (view original):

Posted by crickett13 on 5/8/2015 10:10:00 AM (view original):
With new development patterns it would be nice to see projected ratings no matter the age of the player. Then ADV becomes more important to see if a guy may be a late bloomer or even may decline.

  That would make me consider moving off 0.

Projected for when? When a 35 yr old is 40? I'm more interested in what he'd look like at the end of a three year deal.

Once the player turns 27 then for the next season. That lets you see if there is still room for growth or if the player is likely to decline

Posted by rhyno026 on 5/8/2015 10:21:00 AM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/8/2015 7:11:00 AM (view original):

Posted by rhyno026 on 5/8/2015 2:14:00 AM (view original):

Posted by joshkvt on 5/7/2015 8:00:00 PM (view original):

Posted by rhyno026 on 5/7/2015 7:48:00 PM (view original):
My two cents: I hate the proposed changes to the amateur draft system. When a professional team scouts a player they gain a firm understanding of the players current skill level. For us to scout and not be able to see current ratings is unrealistic. When I finish playing through the seasons I've already purchased I don't believe I'll be purchasing more.

Comparing this to RL doesn't work. Professional teams' scouts are wrong about players' current ability all the time. Because this is a game based on ratings as opposed to RL skills, a player's current rating is accurate. A scout's take on how an LSU junior hits a curveball is not always accurate, and less likely to be accurate for a HS power hitter. There are first-round picks who never get out of A ball; that would never happen if RL teams always have a firm understanding of current skill level. It's more unrealistic that as the game works now we all see the same, 100% accurate current ratings.

The purpose of the change is not to mirror real life but to introduce ways to make ADV important. Getting rid of current ratings for other teams' players accomplishes that to some degree.

I'd argue that professional scouts are very rarely wrong about a player's current skill level, unless of course they're somewhat inept at their job. Either a player can presently range to his left or he can't, he can hit a curve or he can't, he can frame a pitch or he can't... these are things a trained eye can see. Good scouts aren't going to evaluate these types of things incorrectly. They may however mistakenly misjudge a player's potential to learn and improve, which more often than not is when you see a 1st round pick fail to ascend above A ball.

That's why not being able to view any type of current rating is unrealistic. If the goal is to eliminate the predictability of prospect development, change the development patterns and "fuzzy" up the projections. That stuff doesn't bother me because it still somewhat mirrors real life. Sacrificing realism (things a scout could see from the stands) in an effort to make advance scouting more "important" seems a bit excessive, and will cheapen the game for me at least.

I realize some folks aren't going to share the same opinion, and that's fine. I just figured I'd have my voice be heard.

I assume you'd be unhappy if a HBD HS player's "current" reflected what they'd be at the BL level.    Essentially, you take a good HS prospect and put him on the mound or at the plate.    Almost all get destroyed in real life.     So every HS split/contact/eye would be in the 20s/30s as those are "learned" skills.    Would that be helpful?  I don't think so.

You should never assume because it's true what they say...

At any rate, this is precisely the one aspect I strongly want them to keep. For the sake of argument let's say we're looking at a LH hitting 23 year old SS prospect with a current contact rating of 60, a left split of 35, a right split of 68 and an eye of 60. Let's say his defensive ratings are also decently strong, if not a bit below average at this point. Now no one knows in real life how a player is going to progress, and I don't have a problem if the game designers want to make it harder to decipher that on here. At this very moment though if I could use a 2B on my big league club I can look at this guy and ascertain that he'd at least be capable of holding down the job defensively, but I'll see some struggles from him against LH pitching. Is that helpful? Plenty.

If I spend 20 million in college scouting and can only see a bunch of "fuzzy" projections I have no way of knowing if the guy's going to be any help now. My scout might have been "watching him", and he came back to me with all these nifty projections, but somehow he couldn't tell me if the kid could make contact now? Is that realistic? No. Is that helpful? No.

There's so much on file that virtually nothing can go unchecked.

So I thought "Maybe rhyno drafts/signs players and puts them straight to the bigs."    I check your rosters and the fastest to the bigs had 3 minor league seasons.  So the main point of your post is not something you do. 

You aren't drafting anyone to help you now.    You're hoping to game the system, as all of us have, by seeing who's the closest to "helping now" and taking a shot while using very little in scouting.   Not being critical, I've done it plenty of times, but pointing out the reasoning you're using is dishonest.

Lets all just admit one thing. HBD had loopholes you could exploit.

0 adv no big deal just wait for 2 seasons of development.

Low Intl scouting. So what. If that guy is asking for 3 mil pay no attention to the projected and sign him anyway.

Low HS. No problem I just look at makeup and current ratings and can guess where he ends up anyway. Oh and since the ratings are not all that fuzzy the best HS players on my board are still pretty good.

Low Col: See above

The loophole are closing. The game is being made closer to what we thought it was before we knew about the loopholes way back in season 1.

Your cheese has been moved. That's a good thing.

That's it exactly. 

And there will be new loopholes.   We'll find them and we'll exploit them.   But, if these changes do what we think, we won't be using the old ones.

I just got near 0 in ADV with most of my teams...now when I am about to receive some advantage for the sacrifice, oops,
an update changing the ADV so I will now spend a few more seasons trying to get it back up-getting screwed in both directions
but that's life

Posted by kahrtmen on 5/8/2015 10:01:00 AM (view original):
I think the randomization of the prospect development pattern is a good thing - there's no reason that all players should improve at exactly the same rate.  However, this change further dilutes the value of the ADV change.  From what I can see, the ONLY reason to up your ADV is to see the ratings history of players on other teams.  That's not a huge incentive for anything other than trades for young prospects.  The development randomization further dilutes that impact.  In short, I think there is no need to move off of ADV.

It doesn't dilute the change, it adds to it.  It would take some work to export all player ratings every year to a spreadsheet, but if the development pattern was the same as it has been I might actually do it.  Then we could accurately predict a players projected rankings the same way we always have, though it would take more effort.  But because the development patterns are being randomized to some degree, the only way to know a players potential is by scouting him well.  And unless you scouted him as a prospect, that requires ADV.  That's what you will get from ADV.  Not a thorough history, but a more accurate projection.

With that said, Mike is 100% right.  If this doesn't affect proj rankings for Col/HS/IFA scouting, then it is mostly a nonfactor and I'll stay at 0 ADV.  I do like the changes as a whole though.

BJB made a great point in our world.

Let ADV give you projected ratings for all prospects. HS, College and Int determine the number of guys you can see BUT for every guy, you get to see his Amature career stats. Every HS or college season. Every INT season. They have these numbers in the real world. Why not here?

Sorry but I don't think that's a great idea. It simply makes you move where you do 0 so it still leaves you a way to set a budget to 0 without much penalty.

The idea is that if you do 0 there has to be a significant penalty in that area.

In that plan I just go 20 adv and then 20 in 1 scouting area and 0 in the other 2.

I don't believe so. I have guys in my Hi-A who went 25-2 with an ERA of 2.14. They will never make the majors but they still are very impressive. Same with Prospects.

Honestly, the more info you have, the less you need projections.    That's why currents won't be available and why amateur stats won't help accomplish the perceived goal of this change.