Draft Improvement Topic

MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
I'm far from suggesting that everyone sees every player.

You used a real-life example about picks 1 and 2. That makes it seem like you believe everyone should see the top players. Then, when I suggested that maybe I'd only budget 25% so I could see the top 25, you went back to random.

You can't have it both ways.
2/7/2010 12:52 PM
coldfeet
Posts: 382 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 18 2 4
Prospect
if you read back i suggested that only the team spending the max sees all players. if there is a random filter it should punish/limit the team spending less on budgets.

i dont understand your argument, sure your scouts missed on the best player in the country, but they did see other guys that are good.





2/7/2010 1:09 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By coldfeet on 2/07/2010
this is a game , one which i believe the we the players would like to be a realistic as possibly, while still understanding it is still only a game.

if the yankees had the overall #1 pick, and the sox had the #2 overall pick....how realistic is it that the sox draft a player a stud SR. starting pitcher from stanford with the second pick that the yankees did not know existed?





OK, the Yankees didn't spend the max. Could they miss the stud SR SP from Stanford?
2/7/2010 1:11 PM
nfet
Posts: 204 (0)
Hall of Famer
8 1 44 52
Prospect
i think the difference between this and real life is that in real life there are a lot more guys that look good, but end up not good. In HBD, if you want to see all the other guys that are good, you gotta throw in a bunch of guys that look good, but end up not good.

If you're ok with having your 4th pick overall turn into a career AA guy from time to time, then maybe realism is the way to go.

2/7/2010 1:12 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
You can't. Have it. Both ways.

Your posts, not mine.
2/7/2010 1:13 PM
coldfeet
Posts: 382 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 18 2 4
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By coldfeet on 2/07/2010
lets assume my biggest franchise need is a catcher. i've put 20/20 into HS/college scouting. lets assume that there is one catcher in the draft that is head and shoulders above the others. a joe mauer type.

i have spent the max, should i not see him? i see the majority of the other lesser catchers, and i do see some other players at positions i do not have a need who could be almost as valuable. what explains my scouts not knowing the stud C existed? dumb luck.



2/7/2010 1:13 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 2/07/2010
Quote: Originally Posted By coldfeet on 2/07/2010

this is a game , one which i believe the we the players would like to be a realistic as possibly, while still understanding it is still only a game.

if the yankees had the overall #1 pick, and the sox had the #2 overall pick....how realistic is it that the sox draft a player a stud SR. starting pitcher from stanford with the second pick that the yankees did not know existed?






OK, the Yankees didn't spend the max. Could they miss the stud SR SP from Stanford?


2/7/2010 1:21 PM
coldfeet
Posts: 382 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 18 2 4
Prospect
Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 2/07/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By MikeT23 on 2/07/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By coldfeet on 2/07/2010

this is a game , one which i believe the we the players would like to be a realistic as possibly, while still understanding it is still only a game.

if the yankees had the overall #1 pick, and the sox had the #2 overall pick....how realistic is it that the sox draft a player a stud SR. starting pitcher from stanford with the second pick that the yankees did not know existed?






OK, the Yankees didn't spend the max. Could they miss the stud SR SP from Stanford?






if the yanks had the first pick, they probably should plan accordingly for the future draft. what i'd like to see.. if that yankee team spent the max, they should see all of the available blue chip prospects. if they spend less than the max, then there should be a penalty in terms of what they see, or how they see it.

i do not like the option that they spend 20/20 to see 3 out of the 5 best choices as much.

2/7/2010 1:28 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Is it realistic to believe that any team with a single scout and a couple of bucks to buy a Baseball America doesn't know the best 50-200 players in the upcoming draft?
2/7/2010 1:31 PM
coldfeet
Posts: 382 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 18 2 4
Prospect
do you believe some scouts are better than others. if i have the best scouts, shouldn't i at least know joe mauer exists and have more accurate reports on his abilities. if i have the best available scouts shouldn't i be better off than the guy reading mel kiper.

2/7/2010 1:35 PM
MikeT23
Posts: 58012 (0)
Hall of Famer
87 1 47 1 189
Prospect
Of course there are.

Do you think Baseball America lists the 367th best player in America in the top 50?

We can dance around this all day(I won't, there's a game I want to watch) and we're going to end up in the same spot. Every MLB team knows the top players. They may have #10 rated #3 or #46 at #18 but they know the names. But HBD isn't the same as MLB. If a player has 78 power and is project to 99 with your 3m budget, you know he is somewhere between 78 and 99. Real players don't come with little numbers like that.

The only obvious fix, without a complete overhaul(and even this is huge), is to change current to nothing better than 50. Then the players would have to make HUGE improvements to become BL players. Your budget would give you more accurate projected ratings. So instead of 6-10 points in the first year, they'd be making 18-20 point improvments in their first season.

If they did this, letting everyone see every player wouldn't be so bad. Except for the collusion aspect.
2/7/2010 1:45 PM
toddcommish
Posts: 5100 (0)
Hall of Famer
520 10 1 14 16 90
Prospect
Actually, it wouldn't be so terrible to have the system designate the "HBD America Top 100 Prospects", but you don't see the exact ratings for some of them. Just like some the "Top 100" prospects don't always pan out, some of these will end up not being what WE would choose to draft.

So, maybe you move those guys into your draft list, maybe you prefer to rank someone that your scouts actually rated.
2/7/2010 2:00 PM
raidersfan
Posts: 130 (0)
Hall of Famer
54 10 49 70 9 232
Prospect
Not sure if this was stated and don't feel like looking through this whole thread, but do people always really know who will be the studs and stars in a draft class? The draft should have some big time surprises, not all "Studs" should be great and there should be some surprises as well.

Horrid #1 picks in the last 15-20 years or so:

Matt Bush
Brien Taylor
Bryan Bullington
Paul Wilson
Matt Anderson

Amazing late round picks:

Mike Piazza (62nd Round)
Jeff Conine (58th Round)
Kenny Rogers (39th Round)
Roy Oswalt (23rd Round)
Russel Martin (17th Round)
Albert Pujols (13th Round)
Dan Uggla (11th Round)
Mike Lowell (20th Round)
Clint Barmes (10th Round)
Jason Bay (22nd Round)
Nate McLouth (25th Round)
Ryan Church (14th Round)
Jake Peavy (15th Round)
Jermaine Dye (17th Round)
Ian Kinsler (17th Round)
2/7/2010 2:52 PM
mitchrapp
Posts: 807 (0)
Hall of Famer
106 20 14 109
Prospect
Quote: Originally posted by raidersfan on 2/07/2010Not sure if this was stated and don't feel like looking through this whole thread, but do people always really know who will be the studs and stars in a draft class?  The draft should have some big time surprises, not all "Studs" should be great and there should be some surprises as well.Horrid #1 picks in the last 15-20 years or so: Matt Bush
Brien Taylor
Bryan Bullington
Paul Wilson
Matt AndersonAmazing late round picks:Mike Piazza (62nd Round)
Jeff Conine (58th Round)
Kenny Rogers (39th Round)
Roy Oswalt (23rd Round)
Russel Martin (17th Round)
Albert Pujols (13th Round)
Dan Uggla (11th Round)
Mike Lowell (20th Round)
Clint Barmes (10th Round)
Jason Bay (22nd Round)
Nate McLouth (25th Round)
Ryan Church (14th Round)
Jake Peavy (15th Round)
Jermaine Dye (17th Round)
Ian Kinsler (17th Round)


I think it's been said but once MLB players have numbers attached to them it doesn't matter much.
2/7/2010 3:00 PM
jtrinsey
Posts: 237 (0)
All Star
1 4 2 30
Rookie
Quote: Originally posted by MikeT23 on 2/07/2010The only obvious fix, without a complete overhaul(and even this is huge), is to change current to nothing better than 50.   Then the players would have to make HUGE improvements to become BL players.   Your budget would give you more accurate projected ratings.  So instead of 6-10 points in the first year, they'd be making 18-20 point improvments in their first season.

I like this idea. Then makeup would become a lot more important and you actually would have more of the 1st-round guys flaming out because they had low makeup and didn't develop properly or they didn't get enough reps, or got hurt a couple times, etc.

Of course, then you would get people crying about how their 1st-round guy didn't become a Hall of Famer.

The funny thing is, the majority of people who cry about fixing the draft seem to be tankers who are imagining scenarios where they pick top-3 and miss out on their franchise savior. And the fixes they propose (more randomness, which would have to be the trade-off if you see all of the guys) actually hurt the weak teams more.
2/7/2010 3:48 PM
◂ Prev 1...4|5|6|7|8|9 Next ▸
Draft Improvement 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.