I love that idea, gjello. It would increase whining from the whiners and I'd be ****** when I got the lump of coal, but that golden ticket in the ~17th round, every seven seasons or so, would be incredibly fun.

thats a spectacular idea gjello

very simplistic and it pretty much accomplishes the task of breaking up the monotony that some of us hate...

I don't hate it but it won't happen. First bust: "If WifS doesn't do something about this nonsense, I'm done with HBD!!!!"

I hate that idea. I can't see that making it any more fun for me. The annoyance factor created by having my 1st round pick turn out to be a bust would greatly outweigh the fun factor from finding a "gem" late in the draft.

Just another way to add randomness and decrease skill.

You'd have to keep in mind that you might get the busts without the gems. So you're always fighting the draft. Many would say "F this", just go after internationals and punt the draft.

Not sure how that would be fun for the whole family.

I see both sides.

It would have to be all or nothing. Either leave it, no DITRs, or gjello's idea is outstanding if it covers the draft and Internationals (ie. the odd high priced international doing a Hideki Irabu, the odd low priced one being magic.)

Further...if gjello's idea went forward, if would have to cover college and high school picks evenly (as the budget is split in two). Otherwise, some nerd would figure it out and stack his budget to the other side.

The appeal of laughing at someone because their $7M international just wrapped his mouth around the exhaust pipe really tickles me. Even if it rebounds on me sometimes.

Either way, it would have to be a lottery chance. jtrinsey's point is also true if you get smoked every single year. 25 rounds, 32 teams + type a's and b's = 830ish draft picks. If more than 9 were targetted either way, too much.

In my opinion.

1) A beautiful thing about this is that you get ****** about a bust on Day 1 of your year. By the time you have to make your rollover decission, you've already had another draft, and another round of bust/gem is around the corner. You've moved on.

(2) If the odds really were about 3 out of the top 60 going bust, and 3 -5 gems each year, then it's really no worse than the odds that your guy goes "bust" due to injury. And, though people complain, I suspect no one leaves the game over that stuff (or almost no one, so don't give me your two examples).

(3) If you want to make this less about luck and cause managers to have something to do with it, then tie the odds that a guy is a bust/gem to a rating. Makeup makes sense- but I like the idea of tying it to patience, which doesn't seem to do anything else. More controlable variables="a" more interesting game. But I'm fine with either the luck option or the tie it to ratings option.

Quote: Originally Posted By gjello10 on 2/26/2010
(3) If you want to make this less about luck and cause managers to have something to do with it, then tie the odds that a guy is a bust/gem to a rating. Makeup makes sense- but I like the idea of tying it to patience, which doesn't seem to do anything else. More controlable variables="a" more interesting game. But I'm fine with either the luck option or the tie it to ratings option.

That's the one.

patience, make up, whatever you want to make it. A lottery akin to poker rather than drawing numbers-still luck involved, but you make your own luck, more or less.

1. I never move on. I'm still ****** that some of my first rounders just weren't good enough.

2. They don't have to leave to have an effect. You know WifS eventually gives in to the whiners.

3. Tying it to rating tidies up the whole thing. If you want to take that guy with 11 patience and 31 make-up, you know you're taking a chance of him preferring coke and cheap hookers to baseball.

I wouldn't mind seeing patience and make-up be a bigger part of things.

Guys with patience under 20 might need to be pushed up very aggressively, to the majors within 2 years maybe, or else their development will slow to a crawl.

Guys with low makeup would have a greater chance of missing a ratings bump or something like that.

Could be offset by coaching: coaches with higher discipline would offset players with low patience. Coaches with higher patience could offset players with low makeup.

I'd be interested in that.

In the end though, none of this is going to happen.

Sorry but the game needs less luck not more.

Thanks for the quality input there, crickett

I wouldn't say he's right but introducing MORE luck doesn't really seem like such a marvelous idea that it must be incorporated immediately.

Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 2/26/2010I don't hate it but it won't happen.   First bust:   "If WifS doesn't do something about this nonsense, I'm done with HBD!!!!"

That's why I like my idea better. Lots of people don't want busts in the first round. I'm one of them! But I do like a little bit of randomness and excitement. If the players are marked prior to being drafted/signed then there's no excuse to whine about it. If you're a risky guy you can draft the "Diamonds," if you want the sure thing just avoid them and let other people have fun.

There could be an option under draft settings to set the number of Diamonds you want to draft and even break it down by round (Do not draft any Diamonds until the 3rd round... Do not draft any Diamonds at all... or Draft as many as possible... all examples).

And Mike, speaking to your point of it only adds 10 studs to the front of the draft--First of all, I don't see it being as adding 30 more players to the pool, I see it as Diamonds replacing some of the good and bad players. And since you don't know which category your Diamond will be in (stud, mediocre, or dud) until later, it will be possible the #1 overall pick in the Draft could turn out to be a complete gas can pitcher.