Posted by joshkvt on 5/8/2015 2:59:00 PM (view original):
Is there any idea brought up that's been completely ignored in these 25 pages? Seems unlikely.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/7/2015 3:33:00 PM (view original):

Would you expect anything but "much whining and crying"?

• A new, fuzzier projected rating system will be introduced for high school, college and international scouting.*

Posted by joshkvt on 5/8/2015 3:27:00 PM (view original):

• A new, fuzzier projected rating system will be introduced for high school, college and international scouting.*

Many seem to infer that ADV will play a role in this change, but there's nothing to indicate that. There's been little discussion about HS/COL/INT scouting by comparison, but changes there could be much more meaningful. Going 10/0/4 has been feasible even with a high 1st-round pick because you could be fairly certain the top players on your HS board, for example, would develop into players commensurate with your draft position. You might miss the top 2 HS players, or 5 of the top 8, but the guy you pick at #12 would surely develop into a decent major leaguer. With fuzzier projections, even without introducing complete busts (again, nothing in the update notes suggests they are doing that), that #12 pick could be a guy who never makes the majors in a meaningful role. If we have to go 16/0/14 to get a solid 1st-round pick and one good IFA, that's a bigger change than forcing owners who like to deal for prospects to go to 20M in ADV.

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/8/2015 3:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by willsauve on 5/8/2015 3:18:00 PM (view original):
I cant imagine that they will make ADV affect projection for undrafted/unsigned prospects without allowing owners to reset their budgets.. I can totally see how making this change would be good long term as it would definitely make ADV more important.. Too many would be screwed by this change and could bail on teams teams that they have marginal interest in which would increase the already large number of openings.. WIS has to have enough sense to where they can make positive changes without ******* a large number of people off.. 

Again, rational people understand that they're all starting at the same place and will make adjustments on the fly while they get where they want to be.

We're both in Mantle.  I don't care that you have a 6m head start in ADV.   There are 20 others guys at 0.    I'll figure something out.  It's a challenge.

Posted by willsauve on 5/8/2015 3:31:00 PM (view original):

Posted by MikeT23 on 5/8/2015 3:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by willsauve on 5/8/2015 3:18:00 PM (view original):
I cant imagine that they will make ADV affect projection for undrafted/unsigned prospects without allowing owners to reset their budgets.. I can totally see how making this change would be good long term as it would definitely make ADV more important.. Too many would be screwed by this change and could bail on teams teams that they have marginal interest in which would increase the already large number of openings.. WIS has to have enough sense to where they can make positive changes without ******* a large number of people off.. 

Again, rational people understand that they're all starting at the same place and will make adjustments on the fly while they get where they want to be.

We're both in Mantle.  I don't care that you have a 6m head start in ADV.   There are 20 others guys at 0.    I'll figure something out.  It's a challenge.

Technically the difference between our draft slots is the biggest factor.. But I'm not worried about myself being upset by this because I'm probably more sensible  and loyal than most people. Even if this change has a negative affect on my current plan I will just readjust and make it work.. Sadly a much higher percent of people will probably bail on their bad siuation and make it another persons/worlds probelm.. Becasue of this I'm guessing owners will get a chance to reset ther budgets.

Posted by alleyviper on 5/8/2015 3:23:00 PM (view original):

Posted by joshkvt on 5/8/2015 2:59:00 PM (view original):
Is there any idea brought up that's been completely ignored in these 25 pages? Seems unlikely.

There have been numerous people who have been told that their point is invalid because their past actions don't back up that point. rhyno026 for instance made a perfectly fair and reasonable point that, by losing current ratings for prospects, it eliminates the possibility that someone may look to draft a guy and bring him straight to the majors, or call him up in short order.

The merit of the point was not called into question. There was no discussion as to whether removing current prospect ratings would actually hinder that strategy. There was no discussion as to how valid a strategy it even is in the HBD landscape. There was no discussion about "is it worth keeping current ratings for prospects to allow this strategy if it allows the loophole of letting people 0 out budget and still see potential prospects." There was no critical discussion about the point in any way, shape or form.

The only comment on rhyno026's suggestion was the fact that rhyno026 had no recorded history of actually drafting guys and calling them up in a short amount of time. And because rhyno026 didn't have a demonstrable history of doing so, his point was shot down. Even though it was a perfectly fair and legitimate idea that at least could have used some discussion. An idea that the developers of this game may actually want to hear and consider themselves, an idea that they may be interested in the input of the people who play this game.

Talk about it? Nah, let's just call rhyno026 a hypocrite and move on.

"We're gonna remove that stop sign."
"OMG!!!!!  There will be accidents every day!!!"
"Mr.T23, we've monitored that area for 6 months.  No one, including you, has stopped there a single time."
"Oh, nevermind."