When I started playing I did this a couple of times thinking I was being sneaky and ended up with a dud each time...so I wouldn't recommend it but as has been stated above it's still theoretically possible for it to work out.

Posted by tlowster on 3/16/2022 10:22:00 PM (view original):

Posted by deroches on 3/14/2022 9:43:00 PM (view original):
I am in the same situation as Brickyard was last year. Except I don't have zero scouting, I have 5 in college ( and 20 in HS). The top prospect on my list is a starting pitcher with a projected OA rating of 98(!!) including 99 control, and 100 against both LH and RH batters.

I have the fourth overall pick. I have no supplemental picks so my second pick is about 65th - the fourth pick of round 2.

My thought is to rank this player #5, so that I def won't grab him in the first round, but will take him in the second round if he's available. Any thoughts? I read through the discussion above, is there much difference between 5m and zero budget for college scouting?

I know this isn't perfect, but a decent rule of thumb is that even with 20 million in scouting, the scouts can be about +/- 10 points off in each rating. For every 1 million away from 20 million, add at least 1 point to each rating that the scouting is off by. So, if you have 5 million in scouting, instead of your scout being off by about ten in each rating, he could be off by 25 in reach rating.

Agree 100% on this scouting assessment by tlowster.

This is why one of the biggest improvements I'd love to see would be for the draft. It would be great if the draft were 2 or 3 cycles with either:

Cycle 1: 1st round picks
Cycle 2: Sandwich and 2nd round picks
Cycle 3: the rest

or

Cycle 1: 1st round and sandwich picks
Cycle 2: 2nd round picks and the rest

Something like that. I would love to see who was all taken in the first round then adjust my draft board based off of the results. I feel like a lot of owners would take a lotto pick in their supplemental and later rounds if the guys were still on the board, but when you have to rank, I think everyone lists their players based off of the more 'sure things' in the first round.