Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 68

Thread: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    RIchmond Indiana
    Posts
    1,068

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by spambox View Post
    I don't know enough about the programing of CSFBL to know if this following suggestion is impractical, so if it is I apologize and ignore it.

    One way to attempt to add more unpredictability to the draft without changing scouting would be to increase the variability in development and/or drills. Vupelcula's thread Potential Bust, what to do? is an example of what I am thinking about. Maybe you could add more players with high potentials, but some of those players would never make it close to their potentials. Even with Full Dev/Drills their actual ratings would only increase 1 or 2 a year. I think this would make sense for 17 and 18 year olds in the draft who might have large potentials, but their actuals just never make it. Major league sports is filled with can't miss prospects who did.

    I would also suggest that greater variability on the decline of player's skills would be good too, more players who reach their potential but flame out quickly, even with full dev/drills.

    Thanks for the changes and the thread to discuss them.

    I don't know about the variability of development, but I know I've passed on drafting players who for instance, had a 90 potential SL, but they are 23 and only at 50 actual. They will never get there. That's something else to look for when drafting.

    RJ
    You are only an obstacle in my quest for world domination.
    -me

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Posts
    385

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    About time!

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Southern California
    Posts
    8,288

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    In the spirit of keeping the game fun, i think super slow devs are a bad idea. There are also plenty of hitters that flame out early. I think pitchers should be targeted more in that category if anything.

    The hybrid draft concept is a great option imo, especially because you can cut bait without wasting years hoping they develop. You know on 7/15 if they are good or not.

    I would also support no potentials when drafting, but i consider that far more extreme than the hybrid draft. I would also expect the see potentials at 7/15

    I hope that deeper drafts means that there is less separation between elite guys and normal ones. That could deter tanking... my fear is what vulp has said, and that all it accomplishes is raising the baseline of what makes a starter
    Happy, but a little lost
    Well, I don't know what I don't know so I'll kick my shoes off &run
     
    2016: 3,437-3,070 (.528) ~ 4 WS
    2017: 8,035-6,518 (.552) ~ 8 WS
    2018: 6,226-5,522 (.530) ~ 7 WS
    2019: 2 WS


    LEGJuan More Inning(2033-)2045, 2046, 2047, 2051, 2054
    GOATUnderpants Gnomes(1994-)1997, 1998
    TCLMisty Mountain Hoppers(2101-)2109
    WBCVenezuela(1925-1932,1937-)1925, 1928, 1930, 1937
    TDDSilver Lake(2104-)2106, 2107
    XBAnaheim Aardvarks(2083) 
    EPSan Onofre(2002)2003
    CarL-2022, 2027, 2031, 2032 | Dodgers-1953, 1955, 1966
    TML-1964, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1972, 1976, 1983, 1984
    Sweet-1886, 1888, 1891, 1892, 1897, 1898, 1900
    AA-2100 | ThrowB-2018 | TP-1983 | BD-2038 | AAA-2101

  4. #24

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    Quote Originally Posted by spambox View Post
    I don't know enough about the programing of CSFBL to know if this following suggestion is impractical, so if it is I apologize and ignore it.

    One way to attempt to add more unpredictability to the draft without changing scouting would be to increase the variability in development and/or drills. Vupelcula's thread Potential Bust, what to do? is an example of what I am thinking about. Maybe you could add more players with high potentials, but some of those players would never make it close to their potentials. Even with Full Dev/Drills their actual ratings would only increase 1 or 2 a year. I think this would make sense for 17 and 18 year olds in the draft who might have large potentials, but their actuals just never make it. Major league sports is filled with can't miss prospects who did.

    I would also suggest that greater variability on the decline of player's skills would be good too, more players who reach their potential but flame out quickly, even with full dev/drills.

    Thanks for the changes and the thread to discuss them.
    I've thought about something similar to this. I agree that I think the issue could be fixed by creating more players who are pretty far from their potentials in the draft but then having more variability in development.

    I assume they have some type of function that takes in dev, drills, age, etc and then randomly generates what happens over each flip for each category. I would think they add some sort of rating on both development and decline per player. So some players develop fast, some slow. Some decline fast, some slow. Maybe have sort of a bell curve, where most players have a normal development, but have dev/decline values tail off as you go in either direction (faster or slower).

    And maybe they already have this in place but it is just hidden.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    Upstate New York
    Posts
    2,430

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    I'm really happy about this change. Here's the main thing I've noticed and I'd like to see changed. I don't need to see a whole lot of changes in ratings. What I would like it see is a more realistic spread of talent. This addresses both Vulp's concerns and the problems with the current drafts. What do I mean?
    There has been an inordinate amount of players with one or two good rating but a HUGE hole somewhere else. That sucks. They will be very up and down. I would like to see a bunch more guys who have perhaps 60s or 70s rating all across the board and play a good role. They won't increase the overall "starter" caliber, but there will be many more guys who you can fill a need with. They may not be a defensive stud with no bat or a huge hitter with no defense. They will just be guys who can play 2 ways. Your typical journeyman. That is very very realistic to real MLB.

    So, if the draft encompasses anything like that, I'd think Vulp's concerns (which are valid) will maybe not be as impactful as thought and drafts will be much better.
    Also, can we just have more defense in the middle? :P No need to have to search for miles to find a 60 RA SS...so bring on the changes!

    And while I'm here, I'll just say that personally, I think development is fine. People are getting smarter about using it, but there are still plenty of players who don't reach their potentials. And players over 30 are valued pretty cheaply anyway, let's not decrease their value more. Drills are fine too.
    "The other team could make trouble for us if they beat us" - Yogi Berra

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Garner, NC
    Posts
    620

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    I am happy to see this change. I was one of those people that struggled to find the energy to comb through the available players to make my 2nd round pick....though I did. The same thing actually occurred when I had very low 1st round picks. So, thanks for making this change and I am looking forward to seeing how it goes.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    central virginia
    Posts
    31,992

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    I am neutral on this change. I see in the short term why a lot of owners would be happy. i am more interested in how it looks in 20 seasons (2 years real life) when the talent distribution curve changes overall. Right now and in the short term, those new players will be useful as teams improve the bottom half of their 25 man rosters. But once the talent equalizes and replaces all the 'bad' 2nd and 3rd rounders of the past, then we will end up right back where we were before, except what ratings level we define as bad will ahve changed from a '65' being an average rating in a category to a '75' being an average rating in a category.
    -Parce que j'ai le jeu, mes chiennes.
    -Translation; 'cause I got game bitches!


    Join the Remake Leagues! No Experience Necessary.

    Simple Rules:

    1. Stop recruiting new owners for your half dead crappy leagues. Your efforts would be better used looking for a stable league with owners who actually care about their teams. Winning the world series in a half unowned league is not worthy of your time.

    2. If you are trading an elite item like a no1 overall pick or a superstud player, then dont take the first offer you get. Advertise your availability to the league to maximize your return. Your trade partner is not going to protect you from underselling yourself.

    3. Quoted from a thread about Monopoly gameplay: "This strategy will end up killing you in the long run. You WANT to make deals. You WANT to be easy to do business with. If players get the impression that you're always going to ask for unreasonable demands, they'll trade with other players, leaving you out of those trades, meaning you get nothing of value while they benefit. Remember, your goal in a trade should not be to screw your trading partner, but to screw anyone who isn't your trading partner. Then people will catch on and realize that if they're not going to give you fair rates, they're going to be left out in the cold, which means that you shouldn't be dealing with people who play that way either."

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    5,542

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    This change probably isn't going to reinvent the wheel, and will likely have a negligible impact on starting pitchers. Where a real benefit should be seen is in the number of interesting platoon options in the draft. These types of players in 1B/RF/LF are always fairly affordable anyway so salary shouldn't be an issue. Thus making a couple better options for teams should modestly improve offense and draft selection in rounds 4-6 without radically altering the game.
    Quote Originally Posted by jellyinsd View Post
    don’t take a team that would have won X games per season over the next 12 seasons, slash and burn down to X-Y wins per season for 6 years, then jump up to X+.8Y for 6 years and crow about how amazing you are.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    20,925

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    I think I'm seeing a pattern here. The people who are raising concerns all appear to be looking at this analytically and quantitatively. Will this have an impact on stats? will this have an impact on game scores? will this have an impact on standings? The answer to all of these questions is...probably not and hopefully not. To the quants out there...the natural reaction would be "if nothing is going to change then why do it??" Which makes sense. however...

    Let me be very clear about something. Improving the depth of drafts is NOT a quantitative change. It's a qualitative change. I know if feels quantitative and analytical since we're talking about numbers and ratings, but this change is to change the way playing the game feels...not about changing how the game plays.

    I don't see an issue with how team/league stats look....or how a leagues scoreboard or standings look. In general, stats look good, game scores look good, league standings look good...none of those things need changing. This isn't about making a change to improve offense, or improve pitching, or make the best/worst teams win more or less games...none of those things. It's about making you smile, not frown, when you look at a draft list. Smile when you look at a free agent list. Smile when you look at your team lineup. Smile when you consider acquiring picks via trade. This is a happy-happy-joy-joy adjustment. Not a number-crunching-stat-changing-get-your-slide-rule-out adjustment.

    Pimp and others have mentioned that all we're doing here is changing what we define as average. While I think it's being brought up as a negative, it shouldn't be. That point is exactly right. It's exactly what we are trying to do here is to lift up what we define as average. Hopefully it has very limited impact on things like scores, stats, and standings...those things don't need changing.

    And that's the point I was getting at with my bizarre AA baseball/MLB baseball analogy. What's the difference between AA and MLB games? The scores are similar, the player stats are similar, the best teams win ~60% of their games and the worst teams win about 40% of their games. The fields are all similar sizes. Quantitatively...AA and MLB are nearly identical. So how come 40,000+ people attend an MLB game and only a few thousand people go to a AA game? It's because at the MLB level the definition of an average player is much higher than at the AA level. It's entirely a qualitative difference, not quantitative. Human beings seem to have more fun and get more enjoyment from a higher level of performance and quality...even if it has no impact on the quantitative results. If every MLB team had to start 4 guys that made under $500,000 per year, game scores wouldn't change. Win totals wouldn't change. The only thing that would change is that fans would enjoy the game less. Similarly, the hope is that If CSFBL offers more major league caliber talent, the only thing that will change is that players will enjoy the game more.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    295

    Re: Improvements to Draft Depth - Discussion Thread

    Fairly new to CSFBL. I love it. My first team was a total experiment. I came away thinking right away that the 1st round talent was the only talent worth having. I still feel this way. I hope these changes make the other 2 rounds of talent worth having other than low cost backups. Improvements can only help in every aspect. Not just keeping interest in the draft but with giving some quality backup when starters are getting a break.
    For the love of the game.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •