Is it just me, or in the past couple years have DITRs gone from nearly worthless, to just insultingly annoying?

In any case, why don't you think of a way or two to add a bit more variability and unpredictability in player development?

(And one may know I've campaigned in the past for accelerated recovery for Traumatic Demotion Syndrome and Traumatic Sitting-Out Syndrome, but after a while one is prone to give up.)

In general, why don't you give an eye to not coming out with things a certain way, then making them more and more unresponsive and disappointing over time, when it comes to how you handle such things as player development. Not asking for distortion, just the opposite. Real life is not always such a downer!

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.

Then free agents should become less predictable -- and the entire pool.

(DITRs seem to be like the player pool over all. Sometimes it seems like HBD over the years of its existence is an experiment in social psychology, to see how people respond to an enforced economy of less and less productivity.)

If you want everything to be a little less predictable, that's a different story.  It's an interesting idea.

Posted by ArlenWilliam on 7/19/2013 10:35:00 AM (view original):
Is it just me, or in the past couple years have DITRs gone from nearly worthless, to just insultingly annoying?

In any case, why don't you think of a way or two to add a bit more variability and unpredictability in player development?

(And one may know I've campaigned in the past for accelerated recovery for Traumatic Demotion Syndrome and Traumatic Sitting-Out Syndrome, but after a while one is prone to give up.)

In general, why don't you give an eye to not coming out with things a certain way, then making them more and more unresponsive and disappointing over time, when it comes to how you handle such things as player development. Not asking for distortion, just the opposite. Real life is not always such a downer!

Its just you. They continue to range from worthless to role players.

There have been several discussions for how WIFS should change developmental patterns.

It has been discussed ad nasiuem why the demotion penalty is in place.

Posted by burnsy483 on 7/19/2013 10:50:00 AM (view original):
If you want everything to be a little less predictable, that's a different story.  It's an interesting idea.

The day everything becomes unpredictable is the day I find another game. 

If everything becomes a coin flip, why not just flip coins for free instead of paying WifS $25 a month?

I've had some awesome diamonds come my way in my hbd days. I don't know if I do something differently than the rest... Nor would I want any one else to know what I might be doing right to get said diamonds

I think DITR are a bad thing for the game. As far as unpredictability is concerned, injuries already add a variable. There are 3 changes I think would help the game to a much greater extent and decrease the desire for unpredictability.

1. Increase signing bonuses at the top of the draft and make the top picks more along the lines of the top IFA which are roughly $20M to $30M (personally I would choose the higher amount.)

2. Limit contracts to 3 years or at least have FA refuse to resign unless they are offered the max amount.

3. Decrease veto total to nullify a trade to 6.

Wouldn't guys like Pujols and Piazza be diamonds ?

Posted by mirky on 7/19/2013 5:26:00 PM (view original):
I think DITR are a bad thing for the game. As far as unpredictability is concerned, injuries already add a variable. There are 3 changes I think would help the game to a much greater extent and decrease the desire for unpredictability.

1. Increase signing bonuses at the top of the draft and make the top picks more along the lines of the top IFA which are roughly $20M to $30M (personally I would choose the higher amount.)

2. Limit contracts to 3 years or at least have FA refuse to resign unless they are offered the max amount.

3. Decrease veto total to nullify a trade to 6.

Three bad ideas.

I'm in favor of expanding the player types that experience the DITR bump, but I think the reward is about as much as it should be.

It seems like every year at least one owner gets a DITR worth posting in the world chat, which is about as much as I want to see. I get the occasional role player, and I've gotten a couple of ML starters over the years, but they've all been RP, C or 1B. Frequency/quality is fine, but I'd like to see outfielders or shortstops added to the mix. They're pretty rare.

That would probably solve all the DITR complaints.   If that long reliever or LH platoon 3rd round pick who's destined to be the 23rd man on your BL team suddenly became a legit frontline player, people would stop complaining about the "uselessness" of the DITR feature.    Well, as long at they get one and not their division rival.

I could get on board with boosting DITR quality/frequency if there were something we could do to identify potential DITRs or influence their development. Maybe tie it to spending a lot on ADV scouting (thus solving two persistent complaints) or coaches.

If certain now-useless player types (e.g., ML-caliber splits and pitches projected but sub-30 control) had minimal trade value as potential DITR candidates to owners who budgeted for that route (as opposed to spending lots on free agents or internationals), then I think that would be an improvement. But if winning lottery tickets were being randomly handed out with more frequency, that would make the game worse.

Tying it to Adv scouting sounds like a good idea to me.

LOL @ Arlen's bi annual "we need more" thread.