Posted by slyman9 on 7/8/2012 1:41:00 AM (view original):
I just find it strange that my team lost Billy Wallace when he only started 1 game this season and was not even in the Top 25 for players at his position. I mean if you even compare him to the players listed above there is a huge difference in the quality between him and the other players at PF in the JR class. I know I obviously can't control who goes EE but it just sucks when a player you figure has no chance at declaring, goes pro and you are left with a huge hole at a position you didn't think you would have to worry about bc quite frankly I didn't think Wallace was that good. 

Posted by seble on 7/7/2012 7:20:00 PM (view original):
stine, I didn't brush anything aside.  I'm collecting results for each world as it goes through the process.  Every season of every world is different.  Some seasons there are a lot of good big guys, some seasons there are fewer.  That's why I need to collect a significant amount of data to make any conclusions. 

bow2dacowz brings up an important point.  The change to ranking of players for the draft was not specifically aimed at underclassmen.  It was just to balance the overall draft class more.  The number of underclassmen in a given draft is small enough that sample size can be a problem.  So when I'm looking at the data, I'm not looking at underclassmen, I'm looking at position breakdown of the entire draft, including seniors.  I'm also including guys that were projected high but decided to stay, which is not info that's really available for you guys to see.

Athleticism	95
Speed	96	4
Rebounding	33	3
Defense	98	1
Shot Blocking	47	4
Low-post	41	9
Perimeter	98	1
Ball Handling	95
Passing	92	1
Work Ethic	71	8
Stamina	84	3
Durability	96

Athleticism	93
Speed	100	1
Rebounding	27	1
Defense	99	1
Shot Blocking	37	3
Low-post	67
Perimeter	48
Ball Handling	100	1
Passing	97
Work Ethic	84	5
Stamina	81	2
Durability	89

Relating to car-crazy's comments that there might be a lot of senior point guards as the reason the underclassman did not go EE, I have looked into that possibility and there are only two senior point guards with higher ratings than the six I mentioned above (Rick Chamberlin of Duke and Ty Gailey of UNC).

Posted by professor17 on 7/8/2012 7:45:00 AM (view original):
Phelan had 16 EE's with 0 guards declaring early. One of the players I offered up as an example of a guard I thought should have gone EE (or at least been strongly considered) was junior Virgil Montijo of Virginia.

http://www.whatifsports.com/hd/PlayerProfile/Ratings.aspx?tid=0&pid=2126009

Seble said Montijo wasn't even projected to be drafted, so had no chance of going EE. Yet now, entering his senior season, he's a pre-season 2nd Team All-American. Part of the problem is that players are ranked according to their listed position. So while Montijo would be an all-world SG or SF, he's listed as a PG, so his BH and PA ratings apparently made him undraftable.

As someone else suggested, a good idea would be to have the draft/EE ranking logic rate players at all five positions, and then take the highest value, and use that for determining who goes EE and where players get drafted.

But I am scratching my head a bit. If Montijo was undraftable as a PG, how does he end up pre-season 2nd team All-American at the same position? Is significantly different logic used for determining draft order and All-American status? 

Posted by seble on 7/9/2012 8:52:00 AM (view original):
Would you guys feel better about the process if I simply used overall rating (or overall rating minus stamina/durability)?  That would make things a lot more transparent and predictable.

Posted by seble on 7/9/2012 9:35:00 AM (view original):
That's possible, but not easy the way it's currently designed.  I'm not sure that would solve the problem anyway.  It's still difficult to get different positions on the same scale to make a valid comparison.