Diamonds in the rough Topic

toddcommish
Posts: 5100 (0)
Hall of Famer
520 10 1 14 16 90
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/22/2010 2:15:00 PM (view original):
'tardcomm, it's not a tough choice.   I'm in the 2nd round, I see a guy who might develop into a stud or a probable 4th starter.   I can't think of any owner who says "Man, 4th starters are tough to come by.  Better be safe than sorry!"
Ah, but I didn't say the DITR would be a "stud", just ML level.  You'd be drafting a guy who probably has an 85% chance of being a career AA-bus rider, maybe a 10% chance of being that 4th starter you passed up, a 4% chance of being a 2nd/3rd starter, and a 1% chance of being a stud.

Would you still take him in the 2nd round (and pay him the 2nd round bonus money)?
6/22/2010 2:22 PM
deathinahole
Posts: 4139 (0)
Hall of Famer
76 2 1 42 1 75
Prospect
Not really dumped on, but certainly not pushing it as much as "give me something for nothing!"

In my head, there's two ways to go; dump DITRs altogether, or balance the something for free with something taken away that was a for sure. Yin yang, and all that.

And that is the right opinion. Because, unlike apollo's misguided judgement, I do speak for the majority, even if I am an arrogant self righteous rick (really I'm a James, however...)
6/22/2010 2:24 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
On most of my teams, yeah, I would.   1m in bonus money and a possible wasted 2nd round pick for a player who very well could be a top 10 player in that draft.   The only time I woudn't do it is my crappy takeover teams.  They have never had any depth so I wouldn't be able afford to lose a pick in the top 50.
6/22/2010 2:25 PM
toddcommish
Posts: 5100 (0)
Hall of Famer
520 10 1 14 16 90
Prospect
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/22/2010 2:25:00 PM (view original):
On most of my teams, yeah, I would.   1m in bonus money and a possible wasted 2nd round pick for a player who very well could be a top 10 player in that draft.   The only time I woudn't do it is my crappy takeover teams.  They have never had any depth so I wouldn't be able afford to lose a pick in the top 50.

Perhaps, but for all your naysaying, my way is still > the current DITR and 1st-round=sure-thing way

6/22/2010 2:30 PM
apollo7
Posts: 429 (0)
Hall of Famer
40 91 36
Prospect
I'm just curious, how do you know your speak for the majority? 
6/22/2010 2:30 PM
apollo7
Posts: 429 (0)
Hall of Famer
40 91 36
Prospect
Also curious that instead of responding to my argument, you just say its dumb and I should shut up because YOU speak for the majority.  That is a pretty weak position.
6/22/2010 3:59 PM (edited)
tecwrg2
Posts: 237 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 2 3 94
Prospect
Posted by apollo7 on 6/22/2010 1:52:00 PM (view original):
I understand your point but I disagree that it would dumb down the game to any real measurable effect.  My suggestion mearly makes it so DITR's have maybe 50/50 chance of contributing at the major league level at some point, depending on extent of increases, makeup, and how they are developed.  As you well know even if you have a player with ML quality projections it still takes makeup and proper development to get them there...ie:  coaching skill.  I'm not saying that everyone should be given a guaranteed ML player every year...that's is taking my arguement to the extreme.  I am saying that you could give everyone a player each year that, with proper development, has a chance (note:  a chance) at making an ML team in some capacity.  Again, not saying that the DITR process should make all-stars, just a chance, with proper coaching, of making some players that contribute.  This would not, in any way that I see, unbalance the game, or dumb down the game, it would just add another way, on top of free agents, rule 5, trades, draft, of filling your ML roster. 

This would be the equivalent of an additional 4th round pick maybe...definitely not game breaking, unbalancing, or dumbing down.   Your arguments against are taking everything to the extreme level.
Adding more potential ML talent, without taking away potential ML talent in some other way, just has the net effect of creating more major leaguers.  Or better major leaguers, if that term suits you better.  I just don't see how that necessarily makes the game better or more "fun".  It just waters down the talent pool. 

More available talent = less challenging to fill a 25 man roster with quality players.  Less challenging = less fun (for many people).
6/22/2010 2:33 PM
deathinahole
Posts: 4139 (0)
Hall of Famer
76 2 1 42 1 75
Prospect
Let me put it this way; my head size is in the 99th percentile. I'm freaking Great Gazoo.

It's the only way that the good Lord could jam in all that grey matter.

From that above average intelligence comes the ability to speak for the people, even when the people do not know what's good for them.

It's hard to deal with sometimes, but with great ability comes great responsibility.
6/22/2010 2:34 PM
tecwrg2
Posts: 237 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 2 3 94
Prospect
Posted by apollo7 on 6/22/2010 2:30:00 PM (view original):
I'm just curious, how do you know your speak for the majority? 
DIAH speaks for all of Canada.
6/22/2010 2:34 PM
apollo7
Posts: 429 (0)
Hall of Famer
40 91 36
Prospect
tecwrg2, that is a very valid pont and I acknowledge as much.  Thank you for logically stating a valid point instead of being arrogant and insulting.  However, I think this could be overcome with some very minor adjustments to the total talent pool.  My understanding is that every year's draft pool and IFA pool is adjusted based on existing talent anyway.

Merely adding a slight...SLIGHT...element of randomness, and adding a LARGE increase in fun, in my opinion.
6/22/2010 2:40 PM (edited)
tecwrg2
Posts: 237 (0)
Hall of Famer
1 2 3 94
Prospect
Posted by apollo7 on 6/22/2010 2:37:00 PM (view original):
tecwrg2, that is a very valid pont and I acknowledge as much.  Thank you for logically stating a valid point instead of being arrogant and insulting.  However, I think this could be overcome with some very minor adjustments to the total talent pool.  My understanding is that every year's draft pool and IFA pool is adjusted based on existing talent anyway.
"My understanding is that every year's draft pool and IFA pool is adjusted based on existing talent anyway."

Where does this come from?
6/22/2010 2:39 PM
toddcommish
Posts: 5100 (0)
Hall of Famer
520 10 1 14 16 90
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg2 on 6/22/2010 2:34:00 PM (view original):
Posted by apollo7 on 6/22/2010 2:30:00 PM (view original):
I'm just curious, how do you know your speak for the majority? 
DIAH speaks for all of Canada.

But Canadians are only worth .72 Americans

6/22/2010 2:39 PM
apollo7
Posts: 429 (0)
Hall of Famer
40 91 36
Prospect
Posted by tecwrg2 on 6/22/2010 2:39:00 PM (view original):
Posted by apollo7 on 6/22/2010 2:37:00 PM (view original):
tecwrg2, that is a very valid pont and I acknowledge as much.  Thank you for logically stating a valid point instead of being arrogant and insulting.  However, I think this could be overcome with some very minor adjustments to the total talent pool.  My understanding is that every year's draft pool and IFA pool is adjusted based on existing talent anyway.
"My understanding is that every year's draft pool and IFA pool is adjusted based on existing talent anyway."

Where does this come from?
Now your going to make me read through all the developer posts again, aren't you.  This is what I remember reading way long ago, but I have been wrong before...I'll see what I can find.
6/22/2010 2:41 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Posted by toddcommish on 6/22/2010 2:30:00 PM (view original):
Posted by MikeT23 on 6/22/2010 2:25:00 PM (view original):
On most of my teams, yeah, I would.   1m in bonus money and a possible wasted 2nd round pick for a player who very well could be a top 10 player in that draft.   The only time I woudn't do it is my crappy takeover teams.  They have never had any depth so I wouldn't be able afford to lose a pick in the top 50.

Perhaps, but for all your naysaying, my way is still > the current DITR and 1st-round=sure-thing way

I disagree.   The DITR is what it is.   I've gotten 60+ seasons of DITR, more or less.   As I recall, I've gotten four who will/are/could have been BL players.  Two were RP with 60 IP DUR/STM combos.   One made two A/S games, the other was a throw in to complete a deal(because he was DITR, it was easy to deal him because, before DITR, he was nothing).   He made at least on A/S game.   The other was a power hitting 1B with the 90 power/eye combo and his splits became low 50.   Unfortunately, he got caught in the great power outage and quickly became history.   The fourth is a catcher with insane D/PC and his hitting became BL-level.

That seems about right for nothing.   None are Mike Piazza but all of my first rounders are still BL players.
6/22/2010 2:43 PM
apollo7
Posts: 429 (0)
Hall of Famer
40 91 36
Prospect
In regards to the quality and depth of both the draft pool and IFA pool being based on the league's current talent pool, this what I could find (and it does in fact appear to be totally random based on these responses...I stand corrected):

 
 
How many players are generated per amateur draft? Is the process completely random are are there targets for so many starting pitchers, SS's, catchers etc? (robocoach - Hall of Famer - 4:05 PM)
Targets for each position. The quality is based on a realistic model, but there's always variation from world to world, season to season.
 
 
Just finishing up Season 10 in Bench and the draft still suffers from horrible distribution of positions. Tons of left-fielders... a handful of center-fielders and a poor mix in between. Aggravating the problem is I generally move many of the poor defensive players at other position to LF. When can we expect a more realistic distribution of positions in the draft? (showofforce - Hall of Famer - 12:09 PM)
Two responses to this one. The position of prospects in the draft are based on your scouting budget. The more you spend, the more accurate the position projection. The less you spend, the less accurate. As far as the distribution goes, we put in a ton of time with this to ensure the realism. And it's definitely working but what's important to note is that you won't see the same distribution season to season, world to world. Like in real life, every draft class is different. Some years it's pitcher heavy, some years it's slugger heavy, etc.
 
 
It seems like the talent in the college and HS draft has had a ceiling put on it as I've seen several IFA's with better projections than anyone in the draft. Is this the direction of the future? Thank you. (cp49 - Pro - 1:25 PM)
Not true. The model for each is the same.
 
 
The International FA talent is something that is generally known throughout the league in MLB PRIOR to the time that they become eligible to sign with an MLB team. Would it be possible to generate pre-budget emails along the line of, "A bumper crop of INT FA...", or, "Sort of a quiet INT FA market this season..." to help avoid budget being wasted for rebuilding teams? (randallball - Hall of Famer - 3:30 PM)
We don't know the total amount of IPs that will be generated every season since it's all random. On top of that every owner in the world budgets a different amount of money towards prospects so it would be near impossible to generate these emails in a meaningful fashion.
 
 
are international prospects generated at random, or do they consider the amount of talent in a given league? (schedule1 - Hall of Famer - 12:43 PM)
IPs are generated at random.
 
 
Why is there more major league talent for starting pitchers (mediocre) in the ametuer drafts? There are quite a bit low level ml prospects, but seems to be very few potential major league pitchers. (oddson - Hall of Famer - 3:53 PM)
Each season the distribution is different so one season might be heavy with high caliber 3B/1B while another season it might be a higher distribution of Relievers.

6/22/2010 3:53 PM (edited)
◂ Prev 1...3|4|5|6|7...12 Next ▸
Diamonds in the rough Topic
△Top△Bottom

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2026 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.