I am thinking of going high in one and low in the other. Are there any really difference between the quality of prospects? And why would you pick one over the other?

Thanks

I usually put my HS scouting down to zero and go high in college. I feel this gives me a slew of benefits in and of itself, but the reason I like college players is because they have a tendancy to start with higher ratings that are closer to their projections. If you're picking one over the other, no sense getting the players that will require extra years to develop. That's the way I look at it, anyway.

It is because of opinions loke prezuiwf yhat I go more in high school and low in college. I believe more go high in college so I will get a better college high school player.

If I were you I would look to see if the teams go highre un college or high school and go with the one they are spending less money in.

The college players do get to the majors quicker.

That is better high school player in the 1st paragraph. Sorry.

Very fair point, strategically it might make sense to go with HS. Of course whichever one you go with, you need to be committed to, because if you ever want to switch it up it will take several seasons to do so (due to restrictions on how much you can modify scouting budgets).

my head exploded reading moosep's post. But, I agree with him, I think.

I think most people take college because they get to majors quicker but it is real important to check and go from there.

Quote: Originally Posted By dmurphy104 on 5/05/2010my head exploded reading moosep's post. But, I agree with him, I think

i understood it fine...but i also had the secret decoder ring from my sons box of apple jacks...

Quote: Originally Posted By Save_Mr_X on 5/05/2010

Quote: Originally Posted By dmurphy104 on 5/05/2010
my head exploded reading moosep's post. But, I agree with him, I think.

i understood it fine...but i also had the secret decoder ring from my sons box of apple jacks..

Sorry fellas, but I think you get the drift. After rereading it my head exploded too.

In my opinion, the optimal age or at least the ones I like drafting - 19 and 20 year olds. Get to the ML level a bit quicker and still has years to improve big with the ratings.

I prefer players straight out of HS because it gives me more freedom to help them hit their projections.

Assuming all players met their projections...do you think more top players come from HS or Col?

Not sure anyone had figured that one out. At least not said it publicly.

I just decided to give it a quick look using a rough system. I checked out the last 3 drafts from the last 3 worlds and counted the HS players in the top 32- there were 44, 45, and 46 respectively (each out of 96), which means a 47/53 split in HS/Coll first rounders.

I then checked the budgets, and there was a slight bias towards college scouting, which likely explains the slight lean towards college players.

Someone can do more thorough research if they like, but I would bet that the talent split is very close to, if not exactly, 50/50.

Also, I fail to see the logic in having a large differential in the two budgets. It seems horribly inefficient to constrain your selection to half of the available players. I tend to set them similarly and maybe favor HS by a mill or two since the fuzziness is more detrimental for players further from their peak.