Discussion Forum

Forum >> Discussions >> Official Draft Change Discussion   Bookmark This Forum Thread

Post ID Date & Time Game Date Function
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
So after hearing all the comments about the current draft method, it’s obviously time to discuss overhauling the system. After developing the recruiting model for Hardwood, I think the answer is to move to something similar to that where all the year’s potential draftees are visible and clubs can pursue the prospects they think fit their team the best.

Obviously the recruiting model works for college basketball, but we need to do a draft for baseball. So how do we institute it?

I think rather than have the prospect “commit” at random times, the prospects in Broken Bat should be drafted best to worst. The real question becomes, how should teams compete for each prospect and what priority or how are conflicts resolved. If you consider the top prospect, he might well have more than a hundred teams interested in his services.

I going to start the development of the new prospect pool…but the drafting mechanism is still an open issue.


Steve
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I imagine this would be pretty difficult to do...

Priorities would be a nightmare. If you want to do something like that, the best solution may be for people to create a "draft board" with the top 100 picks. Then randomly give the guy to one of the teams that ranked him highest. Problem is, even with 100 picks, some teams would lose out because all 100 top players would be placed elsewhere before they got a player...

Could consider making draft pools per League. So each League gets its own draft pool. That would be more manageable, and then the draft board concept would be doable. If it is a League pool, people would only need 12 players listed on their board each week.

Set priorities would still be nasty as some teams would just end up with all the best players. If a draft order were created based on Ranking or something (still don't recommend), at a minimum I would make sure its a snake draft. Could possibly do a random order in the first round followed by a snake draft. If it wasn't random, there would be a lot of people gaming the system each year to make sure they got the #1 or #2 spot for their League.

Another alternative to a completely random first round would be a weighted random. So more like the NBA draft. Teams that finished lower (or coming from a lower division) would get a higher weighted chance to draft higher. Still probably result in people tanking game though... Just to improve their odds.


Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 1:42:31 pm PST
lostraven
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 1269

Corvallis Ravens
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I'll echo some of Rock's sentiments. I'm apparently not the only one who is concerned about teams intentionally tanking. At least right now there's no real tangible reward for not playing your best. As for a snake draft, you'd basically just have to do one of two things, yes? One, you could have a priority list created before a designated time and have the sim pick who's available and at the top. If you run out of ranked players or don't submit a list, then two, the sim picks "best available" for you, however the heck you could have it programatically determine that. (e.g., Yahoo autodraft for fantasy baseball, where there's some sort of ranking assigned to players.)

I mean, really, how else could you do this without 1. forcing a person to be online at a specific time or 2. creating a first-come-first-serve situation? I'll be honest: neither of those sound appealing.


Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 1:58:09 pm PST
Curveball
Joined: 06/28/2018
Posts: 14

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I agree, the only change if any would be have a custom draft for each league which would consist of maybe 150-200 players. Recruiting like in hardwood wouldn't work nor make sense too me in BB.


I do like this current system though because its like real life, every player is never a sure thing no matter what round he gets picked.
Longviewess
Joined: 09/23/2018
Posts: 111

Frederick Keys
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
The current system seems fine. I found the recruiting system in Hardwood incredibly frustrating and was the reason why I abandoned my team over there.

Buzzerbeater uses the custom draft for each league
model and one of the biggest problems with it there is talented players ending up on bot teams and getting stuck without training. Nothing worse than seeing a high talent player stuck on a computer controlled team.
FreddyTheEye
Joined: 11/11/2014
Posts: 625

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
After developing the recruiting model for Hardwood, I think the answer is to move to something similar to that where all the year’s potential draftees are visible and clubs can pursue the prospects they think fit their team the best.

Most of us would love this as an opportunity to draft a little more by position. It also would seem to make the draft much more "fair" each season.

Does this mean no more personal draft board choice at draft time like now?

My personal preference is to NOT be required to do too much work like Hardwood recruiting. I want to manage my team (like now) not build/recruit players all season.

I going to start the development of the new prospect pool…but the drafting mechanism is still an open issue.

One big pool? Or many based on position, age, potential?

Is the plan to draft weekly?
Is it to be a new pool each week equal to the number of BrokenBat managers with players all the same potential but differing ages/scouting reports/ positions?
Or every league has its' own pool the same skill level but you draft only in your own leagues' pool. (so you only have to scout/rank 12 players a week)

Could consider making draft pools per League. So each League gets its own draft pool. That would be more manageable, and then the draft board concept would be doable. If it is a League pool, people would only need 12 players listed on their board each week.


Agreed +1 Rock777 (but maybe a few more than 12 plaers available for the list so all positions are at least semi available)

+1 curveball
+1 longviewess (Hardwood recruiting wasn't for me either)
Yuri84
Joined: 10/14/2014
Posts: 639

Apple Valley Raccoons
III.2

Broken Bat Baseball
Why fixing things that aren't broken?.. The draft was perfectly fine the way is used to be, we shouldn't even have the weekly pool increased from 5 to 10 players.

Honestly, I'll rather prefer the draft where we only need to choose the pool and then get assigned a random player from that pool than Hardwood recruiting system. It's awful.

Randomness is fun. Complex pseudo-'realistic' things aren't. Randomness is easy to understand. It's a dice roll, clear and simple. Complex systems are what killed many games.

Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 4:01:01 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
What I meant by 12 players, is that with 12 teams in a league, the most you would have to put on your draft board each week would be 12. I would hope there would still be a few hundred players generated for each league. The idea is that you would search through those players and rank your top 12 choices each week. You get the highest guy on the board when it is your choice.

I would stay with the scouting reports as they are. It does a decent job of giving a little fog so that #1 doesn't always get the best player. Probably create a new draftee search function that is able to search on components of the scouting report. E.G. "is at least" a "Very Good Hitter".

Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 4:12:30 pm PST
Curveball
Joined: 06/28/2018
Posts: 14

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
+1/2 yuri84


I like that we get a handful of different pools to pick from(high school,college,latin,Asian) and pick the best player or position that's a need and pick said pool based on strength of roster or short/long term need
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
The problem with league draft pools either in total or generated for each round, is that there aren't enough players to really give you choices.

If you're looking for a short stop and you've only got the league draft pool, then you might have a few short stops choices. But there potential might be lower than the stud OF, so you effectively can't take them because the difference is too great (you'd be bypassing to much value).


Steve
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
More choice than if its one giant pool, where you have to comb through thousands of players (which few players will).

I'd rather you didn't have shared pools of players at all, but I was assuming that was a given from the first post. I still think randomly generating players on the fly per speck is a better system. For instance, I want a 2B. Let me pick a pedigree (College, Asia, etc.) and a position. Randomly generate 10 options that fit those parameters (using position templates as I suggested previously), with a fairly tight range on POT based on what round we are in. Everyone has the same random seed, for each round, so we all have an equal chance to get a high quality player in the first round.

Position templates should be of equivalent value. So for instance, a SS is always guaranteed to have some minimal amount of Fielding, Range, and Arm, but an 1B is going to have a rather high minimal amount of Hitting and Bat Control.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
If you're looking for a short stop and you've only got the league draft pool, then you might have a few short stops choices. But there potential might be lower than the stud OF, so you effectively can't take them because the difference is too great (you'd be bypassing to much value).

This seems like an incredibly realistic and common scenario you should want to emulate? Not sure why you are shying away from people having to make tough choices. I need a short stop, but Mark Trout is available. Yeah, I not taking the short stop. That is what drafting is all about.

Baseball is not football. You are more likely to draft talent than position need, because you don't need the players to perform in year one at the major league level at their given position.

If each league pool had 300 players, you would have ~25 SS to choose from. Given 12 teams, that seems like more than "a few". You could always increase that number to what ever felt appropriate, but I think the more options you have the harder it will be for the large percentage of players who are uncomfortable combing through hundreds of players. I'd be thrilled to put together a draft board from 1000 possible draftees, but I suspect I am in the minority.



Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 5:24:30 pm PST
Curveball
Joined: 06/28/2018
Posts: 14

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
+1, I also don't like that the word "overhauling" is used because its implying that the current system is a HUGE problem when its not, it just needs MINOR tweaking. Rock77 is bang on with his suggestion where we can pick the position we want and select said player from the area we choose(high school,college,Asian,Latin)
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm also a fan of the current system.

If we move to a system where all players are visible, I would suggest a weekly priority list for each round of the draft.

Say ... 10 names?

So you would put your first choice for that round of the draft in your first slot. If unopposed, that's your pick.

If there is competition the player is randomly assigned (like waivers work now). If you lose, then you try the second name on your list. Etc..

You could draft by position. You could swing for the fences with your first few names, but be careful to add some less competitive guys at the end of your list.

That would require a new list each week. Alternatively, could just have one (longer) list that rolls over from one draft round to the next. Could be edited as the draft progresses.
wuggla
Joined: 05/10/2013
Posts: 1058

Colorado Springs Vultures
V.14

Broken Bat Baseball
I thinking draft works good. Maybe make "Recruiter" owners hire him from pool like manager. He scouting draft picks. Choose what we need infielders,pitcher,outfeiders. We still pick what pool and they random pick from 10. But it will be only a catcher 10 of them to choose from.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
@Seca, the problem with this is that there are hundreds of teams. So 10 names won't go very far. That is why I suggested making it the pools League pools if we are to keep them. Given there are 12 teams in a pool, you would only need to choose 12 players max each week. Otherwise, you would need to choose a few hundred players each week to do the type of matching you are suggesting.
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Current is fine. Lists for each League seems a bit cumbersome. At my level I want pitching but go for other VGs when available. I like being equal to higher teams at least once a week and don't want a 2nd/3rd...6th rate pool.
JJNZ
Joined: 12/09/2014
Posts: 1580

Yakima Monster
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
I definitely prefer this system over Hardwood.A subtle tweak could be to change it so that each week you're guaranteed 3 P, 4 IF and 3 OF each round.

Another suggestion would be that as the prospects are created they're assigned a rank by the computer. Obviously some sort of algorithm required, but essential if there's 7560 prospects created (10 for each team), then each round 756 players are released. These rankings remain hidden throughout so no-one will ever know if they draft the No.1 prospect.

To expand on this:
Round 1, 756(x5) prospects are 'released' into the draft. Each team is randomly assigned 5 players to choose from, those that aren't taken go back into the pool.

Round 2 - another 756 prospects are 'released' in addition to the remaining drafts from the first round.

Round 3,4,5 are the same as round 2. Round 6 and on, selections are simply by what's left in the pool.

This is essentially what we have now, but guarantees that all the 8-9-10 pot trash isn't polluting the early draft pools.
hurstdm
Joined: 01/18/2017
Posts: 576

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I rather like that an admin would ask the player base for advice and help for something you're working on or thinking about, rather than just do something major or feeling 100% responsible for implementing something just to see what happens. Cheers!

I like it almost exactly the way it is. Nudges, at best. "Overhaul" feels like too much.

If you're trying to get advice on fixing particular problems, I'd love to see a list of what the perceived problems are? A numbered or "not in any particular order" bullet list? I don't have any idea what the perceived problems are, so they feel kind of vague to me. If we don't know where we're going, we probably won't get there. I've seen some complaining about the draft, but it's hard to gauge how much of this is internet shouting into the wind or a small, vocal minority. The forums don't seem like they're in an uproar or anything.

I wouldn't want anything like recruiting.

The prospects are already drafted best to worst - or something close to it. It does a good job of modeling the randomness of the real MLB draft. First round draft picks are frequently good, but every round past that is more of a crapshoot.

Maybe you'll find this interesting. I did some research for top pitchers and top hitters by draft position. I wasn't going to publish results, but maybe it's worth sharing because it's topical. I checked the top hitters/pitchers in the game (ranked by salary) and referenced them by their draft position. Here's the breakdown of what round these "top" players were drafted:

1st 49
2nd 30
3rd 20
4th 12
5th 15
6th 10
7th 3
8th 7
9th 1
10th 2

It's about what you'd expect. Better prospects are in the top rounds, but it's not perfect. The late rounds have yielded some stars. I like that it sort of mimics the MLB draft like that.

I don't like the idea of league drafting or snake or priority drafting.

One persistent concern seems to be that people want more ability to draft by position. I'd recommend making a player's Range attribute show up (or get hinted at) on the "Draft" tab when the 10 possible draftees show up. That addresses this exact problem without a major overhaul. It's always bothered me that there's no hint for a player's Range. This is one of the easiest things for a real life scout to judge and - as suggested by the way Broken Bat treats the attribute - it's an ability that doesn't change quickly over time. It requires less judgment and projection on the part of a scout. Why wouldn't a scout look at two high school kids and know that one player's Range is somewhere around 19 and another's is around 11? Shouldn't this be obvious? If you're thinking shortstop, you'll tend to take the guy with the higher "Range" scouting report. If you don't care, then you won't care. For hitters, add some sort of fuzzy scouting hint like Fielding:

17-20 Amazing Range
15-17 Excellent Range
13-15 Solid Range
0-9 Lacking in Range

Wouldn't this (1) address this problem, (2) mimic the real world, and (3) represent a very minor programming and gameplay change?

Cheers again for being willing to ask the community for help. Happy to help anytime.
beyondsuburbia
Joined: 12/15/2011
Posts: 6

St. Peters Cardinals
IV.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Personally I’m cool with the current system. Yes there is always a bit of a gamble looking for a given position, but in any draft there are no guarantees and you’ve got to pick what’s on the board. The only part of it I would even consider tweaking is the scouting. Having a bit more detail in the picks to make a more accurate decision would be fun but again I’m completely happy with the current system
allen54chevy
Joined: 11/22/2015
Posts: 475

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Maybe rather than scrapping the current system, there could be a way to improve it.
Curveball
Joined: 06/28/2018
Posts: 14

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
+++++++++


Current system is good, nobody wants the recruitment style used in hardwood, nothing DRASTIC needs to change.

I like JJNZ's idea as well as the idea of just selecting the position and level the most


Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 8:38:13 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Lists for each League seems a bit cumbersome

League pools were an alternative given to having draft lists in a shared world pool (what we have now). Not sure how 300 players could be viewed as more cumbersome than 10000 players...?

Still, I agree that a full draft system is probably too much for many of our players. Don't see how reducing the options to 5 players improves things at all...? That just means more luck. And as hurstdm pointed out, the quality per level of draft pick works out pretty nice right now. I'd rather see on the fly generation of prospects so that everyone has an equal chance to get quality players.

In terms of positions, I'd still like to see a template system enforced. That would ensure all players would be reasonable (if not good) at the positions they are listed in.

Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 9:55:41 pm PST
Buckeye
Joined: 03/17/2017
Posts: 8

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I would lean more towards 'tweaks' rather than 'overhaul'. I suggested earlier being able to select high school, college, etc. by check box to refine where you are selecting players from. I think you could do the same thing with position. You could even put three boxes for each position, (NONE, NORMAL, PREFERRED). That would dictate how many or what chance you have of having certain recruits on your list.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
This seems like an incredibly realistic and common scenario you should want to emulate? Not sure why you are shying away from people having to make tough choices. I need a short stop, but Mark Trout is available. Yeah, I not taking the short stop. That is what drafting is all about.

You mean Mike Trout??


Steve
buffmckagan
Joined: 12/22/2013
Posts: 650

Scranton Bears
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
I think the current system is good, but could definitely be improved upon.
However, my concern is, just because someone drafts for a shortstop doesn't mean they'll get a player who is a shortstop.

I liked hurstdm's suggestion of adding range (and/or arm) to the scouting report. It'll create more frustration if someone drafts a guy thinking he'll play a skilled position, but any of his defensive attributes are garbage. Adding that little tidbit could put some more awareness, while not giving away all his info. Buckeye also is onto something with position preferences.

Recruiting would not be realistic, as it's pretty rare for a player to sign as an amateur prospect (ignoring the likes of Vlad, Jr., Acuña, etc.) and even in those scenarios, it's more about the best offer rather than some sort of other reason as to why that player should join their system.

It would also be nice to get player preferences and etc. but that's just too much work with 756 teams, in my opinion. I would like to have more control over weeding out guys I don't want, but not sure if this is the best route.

Hope this helps, and thanks for all you do, Steve.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
You mean Mike Trout??

Yep. I work with a Mark Trout, so I always mess up the name. Regardless, the point is that the game would be both more realistic and fun if we are making hard decisions like those in a draft. Position or skill.

However, my concern is, just because someone drafts for a shortstop doesn't mean they'll get a player who is a shortstop.

I still think player position templates is the best way handle this. Then if you draft a shortstop, you get a shortstop.

that's just too much work with 756 teams, in my opinion. I would like to have more control over weeding out guys I don't want, but not sure if this is the best route.

That's why I suggested we could go with League pools (12 teams) instead if Steve really wanted people to poor over a bunch of players. I still prefer randomly generated guys based on position templates, pools, draft round, etc.
Herp Derp
Joined: 02/21/2017
Posts: 132

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
You can already kind of draft for range if you look at speed. Doesn't always work out, but neither do most major league prospects.
Drafting for position won't work. How many 12 range shortstops or 12 arm catchers have you seen in the draft pools? A lot, right? Plus, everyone would probably just prioritize pitching.

My solution to what is basically a non-problem would be this:
Add more draft rounds.
Maybe Friday and Monday? Twenty picks per season isn't crazy considering MLB has like 40, plus it would make it worth logging in on Mondays after you've been eliminated from the Cup.
And I think it would force owners to either take a stand pat approach or make more tough cuts, which might help the depth of the free agent/waivers pool.

Also... if bot and test league teams never drafted, it might help the depth of the draft pool a little... let them "draft" players who have sat in free agency for months instead.

Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 11:52:39 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
bot and test league teams never drafted

The bot teams are already disadvantaged. Why would we want them to be worse? It would make the game really difficult for new players. And what is the point of a test team that doesn't behave like a real team?

Depth has never been an issue with the draft. Its more about distribution, and the fact that some teams get 5 Very Good Pot players in the first round, while other get 0. Plus we can't draft for position. Really we have no control over things like position or quality of the random guys we get. I assume that is what we are trying to fix. Not just ramping up the talent level of players as talent inflation fixes nothing.

Drafting for position won't work. How many 12 range shortstops or 12 arm catchers have you seen in the draft pools?

Why not. You just specified the only problem. And it is super easy to fix. So let's fix it. That is what position templates would do. I wouldn't prioritize pitching. My pitching is fine. Every team has different holes they need to fill. Having some control over that is exactly the sort of tactical thinking you want people to do in a management game.



Updated Sunday, December 23 2018 @ 11:54:42 pm PST
Herp Derp
Joined: 02/21/2017
Posts: 132

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Increasing the number of active owners makes the game harder for new owners and we still want that, right?
And if we want guys to be able to come in and start winning right away, just punish success like most pro sports drafts.
I don't know that easy success should be much of a concern. I mean, I just took a zero prestige/>700 ranked team and climbed out of LL6 in two seasons... and got back to 5 one season after demoting. It's not that hard.

Also, that even distribution thing sounds like some commie stuff to me. ;)
And I'm not sure if control over draft pool increases or decreases tactical thinking or if it just diminishes the need to worry with waiver claims or free agents.

Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 12:13:44 am PST
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm just skimming this atm, so I'm not fully up on the direction Steve's looking to go here, but I will third the addition of arm and range to the scouting reports. I think that should give us the information we'd need to basically select by position.

I've always liked the suggestion to eliminate the pre-generated, shared pools and just generate ten prospects for each team (with POT weighted for each round on a descending curve along the lines of what hurstdm outlined) when they click the draft button. This would eliminate any early bird advantage. As long as you draft before the next round starts, you'll have the same odds as you would have drafting one second after the round started.

If the issue with that is that there would be some sort of lag as the slate is generated, then maybe generate ten prospects for each pool during the usual Friday event sequence and allow the player to narrow that down to one pool/ten prospects at their leisure.

Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 12:29:33 am PST
sheish
Joined: 04/30/2016
Posts: 49

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I don't think the draft really needs changing. I get that people might want to draft my position, as I often struggle to find good pitchers in the draft. But that randomness of the draft pool means you have to adapt and change parts of your team all the time. Also it makes waivers/free agency more important.

The randomness in the draft and waiver claims is what makes the game more interesting as I've been quite lucky in the draft a couple of years and barren a couple as well. I think too much "control" of the draft would be detrimental and the simple randomness is what makes the game more unique.

I don't disagree with suggestion about adding range or arm strength as they don't change over time, but overall everyone is in the same boat of getting a random pool of players. In my opinion the more uncertainty over players the better and it means that it's more sweeter and enjoyable when you find a POT 14 or above player.
occham
Joined: 11/07/2011
Posts: 258

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I actually like the current system. I would suggest two tweaks -

1) When you get your draft list of available players, it would be nice if it were 'reserved' for a period of time. Maybe 10 minutes? In the three or so years I've been actively playing, twice I've had a person on my board drafted while I was looking at it. This is only an issue in small pools on day 1 but it's kind of annoying.

2) I'd like at least some indication of readiness such as where the recruit would be on your prospect ranking scale. There is nothing quite like the punch in the nuts of a guy like Kyle Yeager. Getting a bad board happens but coupled to that absolutely hopeless training situation was just very demoralizing, particularly for a top pick.

I appreciate the Hardwood approach but I'd rather not go there with BrokenBat. Whatever happens, thank you for so much time with BrokenBat.



Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 3:42:52 am PST
GullyFoyle
Joined: 02/16/2016
Posts: 129

Spokane Wolves
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
Like a lot of people I enjoy the current draft process. I do like the system in Hardwood but its appropriate there and I'm not sure how it would work here.

The suggestions I prefer up to now are just the tweaks to the current system. The ability to draft by position or by pool would be good in my opinion.

The other thing that I've always thought would be good and has already been suggested in this thread would be additional information. It was suggested adding arm and range. I'd personally be happy with just arm because I think its too important to miss out but am happy to see either discussed.

Kudos to Steve for this consultation. Its so good to see.
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I like Herp's comments:

My solution to what is basically a non-problem would be this:
Add more draft rounds.
Maybe Friday and Monday? Twenty picks per season isn't crazy considering MLB has like 40, plus it would make it worth logging in on Mondays after you've been eliminated from the Cup.
And I think it would force owners to either take a stand pat approach or make more tough cuts, which might help the depth of the free agent/waivers pool.


Doubling the number of better players in the draft pools would make waiver searches more productive for those who miss on their drafts...




Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 6:21:56 am PST
xLee227
Joined: 07/06/2015
Posts: 269

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
It seems like the issue most people have with the draft is that some managers get a draft board with 5 "Very good" overalls and some with none. I think something that would help reduce this variability is to just increase the size of the draft board from 10 to another number such as 20.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I've actually had no Very Goods or Goods in the first round more than once. Pretty ridiculous when the best your scouts can give you is "Above Average" options for a first round pick.

I like the idea of more prospects to choose from, but if the pool remains shared (world wide) this just increases the early bird advantage even more. Those who pick at 4:00 in the morning will get all the POT 15s and 16s that are in the pool. Teams in later time zones will suffer greatly.

Randomly generated players in lieu of one giant shared pool is really the only way to keep the odds the same regardless of when you draft. POT ranges can also be more tightly controlled, so no one is getting "Will never play in the majors" guys on the first round of the draft. Now tie that with the drafting by position and 20 choices and we are golden :)

Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 6:28:26 am PST
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
So a 10 name list wouldn't go very far.

I reached the same conclusion as I wrote the post. Finished with the idea of a much longer list that rolls over from one week to the next.

If the premise is visual access to the entire pool (5-6k players?) and you aren't going to introduce a draft currency ("contacts") then a ranked list is likely the only way to go.

The list would work like the draft in Red Zone Action (haven't played there in a long time ... maybe has changed) except with "ties" broken by random as opposed to draft order.

The draft there was fun, but was a lot of work. It was the reason why I quit (couple successive drafts where I didn't have time to set my list). It would be even more work here given the much bigger scope (many more players). I fear it would be especially daunting to new players.

I guess I question whether access to the entire pool is workable here. In Hardwood the pool is constrained - encouraged to recruit locally for eg.. Many of the suggestions in this thread are not following from the "full access" premise (personal pools, etc..). For it to function it would require more disclosure on players (show skills, potential). Even then, probably still clunky.

Few other thoughts:

- "draft by position" is overdone. MLB teams always draft best available in the early rounds. Maybe we need a thicker middle of our bell curve. More playable 12 pot guys that could be "by position" later round picks.

- I don't see a need for arm and range on the report (range correlated with speed, arm deduced from overall). My problem is rarely two-guys-with-the-same-scouting-which-one-has-the-good-arm-oh-no. It's more only-one-decent-option-hey-it's-another-1B-joy.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I like draft by position if we stick with a random 10 guys. If we go the draft board route it would become irrelevant. I agree with not really needing fielding and range reports. I think we have enough information, but I would like to see some at least lose position templating. Seems silly when you get a 6 arm Catcher out of College...

One big difference in Redzone is that they have League draft pools, not world wide. So you aren't looking through 5000 - 6000 players, you are looking through 96 players. That is why I was suggesting we go to League pools if the intent is to go the draft board route. I would still want a couple hundred players per league pool (120 draftees plus some slop for position availability, etc.), so it would still be more than Redzone, It could be manageable if there were some decent search tools (e.g. "only show me guys with at least Good Hitter", "only show me guys with at least Decent Speed").

Even with League pools you would want to have a rolling updatable list. You would need at least 12 players on it if you are last to draft, but you might want to spend one day putting everyone you want on the list, or you might want to just put on the minimum each week.


Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 8:01:22 am PST
Curveball
Joined: 06/28/2018
Posts: 14

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
+

I like the position idea the most.


It would be very simple to just pick a level (college,Asian,Latin,high school) and pick a position that we want to draft and 10 guys from that position come up. So if I want a 1B from college I select college and 1B, it could be set up kind of like how FA and manager search is currently for selecting who we want to draft before going to the current draft screen.

Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 8:27:17 am PST


Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 8:29:02 am PST
lostraven
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 1269

Corvallis Ravens
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
As multiple people have pointed out, Steve, I don't think an "overhaul" is needed, and it doesn't have to look like Hardwood. I think we just want a few tweaks to the existing system. I've been around for several real-life years, and I strongly believe that sentiment is evident in most people's past comments about the draft.

And I'll also echo the sentiment of it being OK if we're desperately seeking a SS, see two mediocre SS that might fill the gap, but also see a Mike Trout. It gives us tough decisions to make: draft for best available or draft for need.

For me, personally, all I really want is:

* a little tighter reigns on quality of player in the first few rounds (i.e., we get our pool in Round 1 or 2 without everyone looking like garbage)

* having more choice to fill positions (i.e., being able to say "I'm looking for a SS specifically in the first round")

Note: In regards to the second point, what hasn't been mentioned, however, is this is difficult in it's current state, because the AI at times gives you a player like this (in this case, with big SS), but the player's skills in no way fit that position assignment. So I tell the AI to pull up SS, and some of my choices are like that? The assigned positions in the draft would, in my opinion, need to be more realistic.

Updated Monday, December 24 2018 @ 8:37:21 am PST
Jason2327
Joined: 09/02/2014
Posts: 717

Abilene Patriots
IV.3

Broken Bat Baseball
I like Rock’s idea of league pools to be drafted from. If you go with an actual draft order,make each week random that way no one can tank to get top tier talent. Position templates is another great idea. Hardball’s recruiting style works great there,not here for the draft. For waivers it might work but that’s for another discussion.

Making arm/range visible would help for one reason big reason,yes you can figure out range off of speed if you’re given a scouting report for speed. Otherwise,it can be anywhere up or down within 6. Arm,there’s not an easy way to figure it out and nor does it come out realistic as often as it should(the catcher with a 6 arm is a good example)
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm shocked. What an amazing Christmas present. The problem with conversations like this is that it's extremely broad. It's madness and chaos, of which I'll gladly contribute.

I'd love one massive draft, but I don't think that's realistic. We'd have to list our top 500 every week. That's burdensome for most and has other problems as well.

I think there are two primary problems with the current draft. The first is the extreme variance in player quality within each round. Megastars and cut and release bums occur at the same time. That's not good for the game.

The second issue is lack of control. We have very little idea what we have in a player before we draft him. Creating and revealing more information pre-draft would make a tremendous difference.

There are numerous ways to improve those problems, but offering specific solutions to them seems to just create more chaos. In my opinion, the best thing for this conversation would be to speak broadly first and get more specific later. Currently there are too many specific suggestions; we need the grand, big picture first.
Tiger504
Joined: 06/17/2014
Posts: 1314

Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers
IV.7

Broken Bat Baseball
I enjoy this game very much. But I do not spend as much time on it as I used to. There are also a lot of casual players on this site.

I am concerned with the possibility of turning the draft into work or a job. The beauty of this site is you can spend a little time or as much time as you want on here.

That is my only real concern. I don't want to kill the goose that laid the golden egg. But any solution that enhances the quality and enjoyment without becoming a chore would have my support.
Philliesworld
Joined: 10/17/2014
Posts: 785

Blacksburg Bulldogs
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
I have been a vocal critic of the draft for a long time. I get it, it works. But I think there are improvements that can be made to the "existing model" that can vastly improve it for everyone. More control on what type of player you are looking for. I am not at all a proponent for more talent. Not in the least bit. I understand the whole crap shoot thingy, I just want to be able to aim my crap shooter. I'm not in favor of having a snake draft or big boards, or anything remotely close to that. No, I just want an aiming device on my crapshooter.

First up what I am in favor of is Rock's long proposed idea of individual pools per manager. I think this in itelf could be a great improvement.

I also would love to have some semblance scouting in drafting. researching a player... While my following proposal doesnt have just a whole lot of scouting involved I think it still poses more decisions at a manager when he is drafting.

Weekly, just as it currently is, teams will get a freshly generated (allowing for decline as the season progresses) draft pool of twenty-five players 15/10 fielder/pitcher. The only visible information are the following, Name, Positions, Lefty/righty status, weight/height, and age. The manager is given 25 points to reveal information. One point reveals the scouting report, and the second the player's skills. Potential would remain hidden. This would give the manager the choice of revealing all the scouting reports all the players on his board with his 25 points or leave some hidden and explore only some of the others skills...
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
+1 @lostraven, specifically this:-

* a little tighter reigns on quality of player in the first few rounds (i.e., we get our pool in Round 1 or 2 without everyone looking like garbage)

* having more choice to fill positions (i.e., being able to say "I'm looking for a SS specifically in the first round")

Note: In regards to the second point, what hasn't been mentioned, however, is this is difficult in it's current state, because the AI at times gives you a player like this (in this case, with big SS), but the player's skills in no way fit that position assignment. So I tell the AI to pull up SS, and some of my choices are like that? The assigned positions in the draft would, in my opinion, need to be more realistic.


I don't mind the draft as it is, but it could use a few tweaks like those listed above. I've had first round boards with several very good players - in 2029 when I drafted the Jedi I had four very goods, and I followed the other three: 1 12pot, another 14pot, and a 15 pot. Last season I had 2-3 good potentials (at most), and drafted a C&R. I'm not suggesting more of the former (though it would be nice), but rather less of the latter, which would be in line with the first suggestion above.

While bigger boards and templates are nice ideas I have to echo Tiger504's concerns that it's too much work - or too big a change - for the casual player. A couple of tweaks offer some refinement and no drastic overhaul.
12twelve
Joined: 02/05/2017
Posts: 131

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Admittedly, I have not read through this entire string yet, but since we are exploring some new options, one suggestion from the past that would take some of the randomness out of picks, and add in some user control, that also pulls some pieces from the Hardwood recruiting model would be this...

Each team is randomly assigned 100 prospects to choose from with pieces of their makeup hidden. This pool is exclusive to that team, and available for the entire season, rather than 10 new ones each week. Each team's pool would have the exact same equivalency in terms of how many 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16 Pot players exist. These are randomly assigned to positions and pool (High school, college, Asian, etc.)

Each prospects hidden data might include: Bats (R/L); Throws (R/L); Age; Positions; Each of four possible scouting reports for hitters/pitchers; Overall Pot rating. Revealed items could be Name and Pool. Not revealed until actually drafted would be actual Pot, actual SI, or actual SI distributions just as is the case now. This would leave 9 hidden bits of info on each of 100 prospects.

Similar to Hardwood, each team would be given one or two "recruiting points" to be used to reveal any of the 9 hidden items for any of the undrafted players. The player has complete control on how much/how little information they want to reveal about a prospect.

If given 2 points each day, a player could reveal up to 14 bits of information among the 900 available for the 100 prospects. Just as is the case now, there will be one opportunity to draft a prospect each week. The owner must draft a player before any more reveals are allowed for that week. Once a prospect is selected, full disclosure is revealed and owner can decide what to do with them. Once a player is drafted, access to the next week's 18 reveals will begin. There will never be more than 18 reveals available in a given week.

With this format, more control is given to owners to draft by position or need or whatever criteria they choose, but the randomness is reduced. Of course, just as in real life and as our game has been thus far, just because a prospect has a high Pot, doesn't mean they will develop to their potential.

I'm not a programmer so I don't know how feasible this may be to put into place, but it would create an equality for all teams in their draft pools to hit it big multiple times in a year, or strike out.

Just throwing this option out for discussion.

Updated Tuesday, December 25 2018 @ 4:28:15 am PST
FreddyTheEye
Joined: 11/11/2014
Posts: 625

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I like the idea of more prospects to choose from, but if the pool remains shared (world wide) this just increases the early bird advantage even more. Those who pick at 4:00 in the morning will get all the POT 15s and 16s that are in the pool. Teams in later time zones will suffer greatly.

Randomly generated players in lieu of one giant shared pool is really the only way to keep the odds the same regardless of when you draft. POT ranges can also be more tightly controlled, so no one is getting "Will never play in the majors" guys on the first round of the draft. Now tie that with the drafting by position and 20 choices and we are golden :)


+1 all day


So happy to see that so many managers prefer just small tweaks to a big overhaul or a hardwood style system.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
The scouting ideas are interesting. Not sure I'm in love with being able to reveal every last detail of a player, but I like the concept. What if scouting allowed you to get more scouting reports, like for Bat Control, Plate Discipline, Arm, and Range?

bigger boards and templates are nice ideas ... it's too much work - or too big a change - for the casual player.

I agree big boards would be a heavy lift for casual players, but position templates are basically invisible to the casual player. They would just ensure that a player could actually play the position he is listed at. Which means we could draft for position (even with the existing draft structure).
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
I do not think a major overhaul is needed. I am a fan of the current system, though more control over position selection might be nice.
dsz071
Joined: 09/12/2015
Posts: 334

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Not a fan of the recruiting from Hardwood. But I am all for adding range to the scouting report AND getting rid of the POT on the scouting report. I'd like to say I don't use the POT to help decide my picks but I'd be lying. I'm also fairly certain I've chosen the "wrong" player, based on POT, more than a few times.
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
In my opinion the current system is mostly fine and could be well served with some tweaks. I would be very careful about ruining the game, or the draft aspect of the game, with too drastic of changes.
alienfetus
Joined: 04/13/2016
Posts: 1

Commerce City Night Bees
V.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I think a draft all at once is a great idea. Also will there ever be trading players allowed?
quanin
Joined: 03/16/2016
Posts: 196

Cleveland Thunder
IV.3

Broken Bat Baseball
So, I've just read this thread from start to finish, and... can someone tell me what problem we're trying to solve? The drafting mechanism in and of itself I don't think needs an overhaul so much as players could use to be a bit less screwy, but Steve's posts don't give the impression that that's on the agenda. Sure, I've drafted my fair share of catch and releases, and some of those were probably released because I'm too impatient for my own good, but that would probably happen anyway. If anything needs a fixing, it's the positions assigned to players. Draftees listed as 3B that should be an OF or a 1B, for example. Most of the players on my list right now are being converted, because at draft time they were given a position their skills didn't suit. Now, I have no problem with that--that's what position conversion at minor levels is for, but if we're going to insist something needs to be fixed, that qualifies as much as anything.
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
Nothing needs to be fixed...if you want to simulate the recruiting from hw in this game, just hit the waiver wire. Keep Draft the way it is!
jakala2018
Joined: 10/01/2018
Posts: 20

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Sorry, i am new here, but first to say:
This is BB not Hardwood. Both games had their own style (and fans) so no need to mix them. Although BB is a free game, a 'Radical change' will discourage old players to stay.

The ideas i like the most are:

1. More chance to get a good draft

It seems like the issue most people have with the draft is that some managers get a draft board with 5 "Very good" overalls and some with none. I think something that would help reduce this variability is to just increase the size of the draft board from 10 to another number such as 20.



or add more draft rounds

Add more draft rounds.
Maybe Friday and Monday? Twenty picks per season isn't crazy considering MLB has like 40, plus it would make it worth logging in on Mondays after you've been eliminated from the Cup.



2. Slightly advantage to active players. It will encourage more active players, like happen at most online games:

If given 2 points each day, a player could reveal up to 18 bits of information among the 900 available for the 100 prospects ...



-login 1 or 2 days (before draft) will get points to reveal additional information of a draftee. ie: draftee with only single comment He has above average overall potential.
-login 1 or 2 days (before draft) will get more draftee on list (ie: 12 rather than original 10).
-login 20 of 30 days will get additional draft round. Pool at additional round #11 is fresh new.
-and so on..

Thanks for reading.
12twelve
Joined: 02/05/2017
Posts: 131

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
The scouting ideas are interesting. Not sure I'm in love with being able to reveal every last detail of a player, but I like the concept. What if scouting allowed you to get more scouting reports, like for Bat Control, Plate Discipline, Arm, and Range?

The details available for reveal would not exceed what information we are already given. When we select our pool now, we get ten prospects and various pieces of info from which to choose. With the attribute reveals using scouting, only the same bits of information would be available but in this case, the owner has the freedom to choose which attributes to reveal and can jump from one player to another of the 100 initially provided. If an owner chooses more scouting info than is provided with that prospect, because we know not every prospect has a scouting report for every attribute, especially with lower rated prospects, the reveal is simply "no additional information available ".

I don't want to make the whole process so complex that it becomes too much work, but rather add a little control to the treasure hunt of the draft.

One other comment about increasing the quality of the draft is that a slight increase here might result in some better prospects eventually hitting waivers. I feel the quality and quantity of the waiver wire has significantly dropped since i started, making rebuilds to try and reach legends nearly impossible.
Yoop60
Joined: 06/13/2018
Posts: 1

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I have a team here and in Hardwood. My 2 cents on what I'd like to see for the Broken Bat draft system is:

1. A list of 20 players vs 10 to choose from.

2. Arm/Range ratings reveal (or scouting) for all players. These tend to be more easily scouted than the other attributes in real life.

3. You can choose 2 positions (instead of HS, College, etc) and get a list of 10 guys at each. This would require draftees be assigned more fitting default positions than they are now. There should still be misses, but not as many as now.

4. Maybe a star rating like Hardwood? So there is some estimate on POT prior to picking a player.

Overall, I think the draft mechanism here works well.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I feel the quality and quantity of the waiver wire has significantly dropped since i started

This is pretty common. For as long as I've been playing the game, people have been making this statement after playing for a year or so. What is really happening is that you have improved your team a lot, and you have gotten better at seeing which players have upside. This makes it seem like there are less quality players on the waivers. Quantity hasn't really changed, just your assessment of what is "quality" has changed.
Meccanodonte
Joined: 04/21/2014
Posts: 370

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
As someone especially critical about the draft in the recent period, I don't have a clear idea about improvements.
I don't dislike the current system, in all truth.
What I'm complaining about is that I'm into a long-lasting streak of mediocre choice coming from mediocre boards, while other players can choice from more rich boards.

One could invent sometimes - so do I -, but not invent ALL time to stay at the top.

So... I think that something that reduces the volatility of the choices could be good.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I think the two things most focused on so far in the discussion are:

1) Quality(volatility) of early draft boards (e.g. sometimes we get no options higher than "Above Average" in the first round)

2) Lack of any control or strategy in picking (position need, etc.)

These can both be solved via two approaches mentioned thus far:

Shared boards (probably at the League Level) with a serpentine draft where every player gets to choose their top prospects each week out of a couple hundred options. This improves both distribution and control, but can be more time intensive to select 12 out of 200 players each week.

No shared boards, where players are generated on the fly based on input parameters (position, pedigree, etc.) and round number (higher quality enforced at high picks with the occasional sleeper in late rounds). If we go with this approach, additional options (20-25) could be a force multiplier. Most if not all players in the first round should be "Very Good Potential", but would mostly end up as POT 13s. This approach would improve distribution and control without increasing complexity.

Position templates could be used with either approach to enable drafting by position.

A simple scouting mechanism could be added to either approach if desired. This could also be combined with the ability to get further information on Range, Arm, BC, and PD skills for some players.

And a number of other small tweaks have been mentioned. Sorry, can't remember them all to list :(
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
If a shared league board was used there would be no need to generate more than 30-50 players. However, if more information isn't revealed about them pre-draft, that wouldn't help the no control issue.

I can also see people whining about other leagues getting better players. That absolutely would happen.
Hayseed
Joined: 02/20/2018
Posts: 289

Hood River Hawks
V.2

Broken Bat Baseball
My biggest issue with the draft is equality. I live on west coast and probably draft a couple hours after the eastern folks. Maybe this is one reason that the eastern divisions are often better than the western ones.

Another aspect of equality is how some teams get more VG options when often others get none. I don't think I am a bad drafter, but other than 2 rounds in 2037 I have gotten nothing of real value. The high degree of luck vs skill needed to succeed in this game has been the main reason why I have been considering quitting. Otherwise this game is really fun and well thought out.

Anything leading to more decision making, such as a larger draft pool (20-25 players), would make it more fun.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
If a shared league board was used there would be no need to generate more than 30-50 players

12 teams x 10 rounds = 120 players. You need at least 120 players. But I would think that we would want some extras.

I can also see people whining about other leagues getting better players. That absolutely would happen.

Yep, I agree. Although it would still be better than what we have. Its more like insurance, shared risk/reward means its at least distributed at the league level. And it allows for actual drafting of players as opposed to just getting to choose one random card. I still prefer the dynamic player generation option myself.

Updated Tuesday, December 25 2018 @ 11:33:48 am PST
El jefe
Joined: 04/21/2017
Posts: 221

Urbana Cubs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
I don't like how my first round may contain zero VG potentials. Also don't like how a VG good potential player can end up with the worst rating in a minor league system because of low initial skill index.

My view is we should be able to pick the types of players auto generated based on our choice of two atteibutes. For example, if I could pick SI and POT as my two attributes. Someone else could pick a position (P, NP) and POT. Someone else might pick level (HS Or College) and SI.

Something to make it less of a blind, unequal crapshoot.
Oloof22
Joined: 08/10/2015
Posts: 9

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I like the current system. I would just change that instead of getting players randomly at the time you click draft button. Players should be randomly bound to teams for entire week in the way that each player would be bound to only one team. Then you have the whole week to decide which player you want, and noone will take him away. When week ends not drafted players will go back to the pool and they will be randomly bound to teams for another round.

Two issues this may create. You will have to pick draft pool BEFORE draft week starts, but I don't think it's a big issue.

And second more important you will not always be able have 10 players bound. Escpecially in later rounds, or when a lot of teams will decide to go for small pools. This could be solved in many ways, and I don't really care which. Equal number of players for every team. Or teams can get different number of candidates. Or add scouting manager role and number and/or quality of bound players can depend on his skills.

Updated Tuesday, December 25 2018 @ 12:44:56 pm PST
Wine13
Joined: 12/06/2015
Posts: 28

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Gonna jump in here also even though I haven't been real active lately. One reason is because I never get any pitching in my 10 player list each week. So I'm hitter heavy and rarely(if ever) get pitching through waivers. I'm also terrible at how to use my pitching to my advantage(so that could be most of my problem):). OK here goes--

Leave the draft the way it is--you get 10 players when you select either H.S/Coll/LA/Int/All and as a 2nd part of the selection you have 1st priority, 2nd priority and rest for position selection. !st gives 5 players, 2nd 3, and rest 2. you then select 1 or 2 or all 3 of those options. Ex= I need pitching. I hit P under 1st option and rest as my options. I selected College as 1st part, so it gives me 5 College pitchers but the rest are 5 random college position players. But as others have pointed out this is where maybe a Trout or Altuve shows up

Now you have 10 players like we do now. Now the system reveals the stats for these players at their current playing level(whether it be just 1 year or more). This is where the tweak happens. At the beginning of the season you are given 100 draft points. Now you use those points on the player(s) you want. Each round of the draft would last from Friday(when the players are available) to say Wednesday night(when players would be assigned to winning teams). Winning teams are the ones who used the most draft points on that player. It would show you how many teams are "bidding
' on the player but not the points. You decide how many points to risk.
I think this would make the later rounds more enjoyable than they are now. You may not have anyone bidding against you the 1st couple rds but as we get deeper in the draft round-wise you may get 5 people going for the same player cuz the pool is smaller. You could even make the overall pool smaller to make it more competitive with the points right away.
You could even have players not drafted after the year roll over to next year especially H.S. players that then go to college and show more potential since we would see their stats like we can in Hardwood.
just a thought to add to the "chaos"

Stan

StretchDynamo
Joined: 05/16/2016
Posts: 64

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Just throwing in my two cents after reading through most of the suggestions, someone said that you should be able to pick two categories for your scouts to focus on, like POT and SS, or Hitting and Fielding per se. So using this template, owners would select High School, College, etc then 2 main areas theyd like their scouts to focus on, which would allow for people to pick position of need. So if you only want to draft for potential then you may be drafting only projects that come of age in 7 years or so. Or you could potentially draft a pitcher that is ready almost immediately.

Truth be told I don't mind the draft as it is. Although there are some shortcoming sometimes (for some players more often), the draft is generally acceptable. But if we need to make tweaks, something akin to my suggestion above seems more prudent, rather than a complete overhaul.
Kirito_Whale
Joined: 02/16/2016
Posts: 89

Waipahu Indians
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
Like most of you here, I agree and like the current system. No major 'overhaul' needed, a few tweaks here and there, but I feel Rock777 has contributed the strongest points.
toddcates
Joined: 08/02/2015
Posts: 81

Baytown Bombers
V.10

Broken Bat Baseball
Don't fix it if it aint broke. It isn't perfect, just like real life, but it aint broke. Leave it as is. This game has run good since that last server snafu got fixed and we had to replay a whole season. Let's just leave it alone and enjoy playing it.
munciestan
Joined: 12/26/2016
Posts: 33

Walnut Creek Cardinals
V.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm in agreement with most that the system just needs minor adjustment, not radically changed. I'm also in agreement with many who say to not make it so complicated that it becomes "work". One comment that I found particularly interesting was this:
"Why wouldn't a scout look at two high school kids and know that one player's Range is somewhere around 19 and another's is around 11? Shouldn't this be obvious? If you're thinking shortstop, you'll tend to take the guy with the higher "Range" scouting report. If you don't care, then you won't care. For hitters, add some sort of fuzzy scouting hint like Fielding:

17-20 Amazing Range
15-17 Excellent Range
13-15 Solid Range
0-9 Lacking in Range

Wouldn't this (1) address this problem, (2) mimic the real world, and (3) represent a very minor programming and gameplay change?

Cheers again for being willing to ask the community for help."
I'm one of those who is into his second season without 1 Very Good available in my draft pool. That wouldn't be so bad, but I also seem to be at a disadvantage in claiming higher ceiling prospects. Seems they are always going to higher level teams when I follow them.

Thanks much for this game. I have had many hours of enjoyment from it!
BadgerBoy
Joined: 09/06/2015
Posts: 77

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Here is a link to some other ideas that were discussed

http://brokenbat.org/forum/-/5/5930

My views remain the same



Updated Wednesday, December 26 2018 @ 7:36:38 am PST
Benchwarmer
Joined: 01/06/2015
Posts: 445

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I think keeping it similar to the current method would work, but I have two changes to suggest.

1. Create overall pools per week instead of per season. The first couple of weeks would be weighted to have mostly higher pot players, and later weeks lower pot players. Sure there could still be some busts or hidden gems, but overall the earlier week's of the draft should be much more likely to produce starters or stars, and the late weeks most likely to produces scrubs.

2. Allow players to set a position or two they would like to draft, and pull mostly players that satisfy those requirements.

Alternately, without getting into low level scouting like Hardwood (which is part of the reason I stopped playing, it was too time consuming for me vs. BB) perhaps you have a certain number of scouts you can assign to scout certain player pools or scout for certain positions each week. The more scouts you have sent to a pool or sent to look at certain positions the more likely you are to get a high value recruit from that pool or position. Perhaps they might also be able to reveal some of the ratings for players so you have a better idea of what is on your board VS. the sometimes ambiguous descriptions we have now.

In conclusion, I wouldn't want to see something as detailed as Hardwood in this game, but I would like to have a little more control over the draft rather than the mostly randomfest we have at the moment. Just minor tweaks to add some strategy and planning.

Updated Wednesday, December 26 2018 @ 10:15:46 am PST
zonablazer
Joined: 01/18/2016
Posts: 52

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I have no issues with some change. I like several ideas on here. Overall though, no major change is needed.

It would be cool if all 7000+ players were ranked and then at the end of the season, you could see the ranks of your players you drafted.
JJNZ
Joined: 12/09/2014
Posts: 1580

Yakima Monster
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
That's not a bad modification to my idea Zona, having the rankings appear at the end of season. Could have it appear during the play-offs in phases to make it worth logging in for those who haven't made the play offs. Or during the dead 'cup' game day (the one that still happens are the cup has finished)
Luizmussa
Joined: 01/23/2014
Posts: 120

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Got late to the discussion and just dont have the time to read everything right now, but my suggestion is:

1. One draft per League;
2. Generate a 150 player pool since the beggining of the season;
3. This pool dont change until season's end;
4. Teams draft one player per week, same as current system but with access to all 150 players since the beggining.

About priorities: must be based on something, I believe ranking would be kind of fair.
Round 1 and 2 maintain the order, so whichever team picks 1st in Round 1 will pick 1st in Round 2 but from Round 2 to 3 it starts Snake Drafting.

I also have a (rhetoric) question: Are we ever discussing TRADING?

Updated Thursday, December 27 2018 @ 2:36:51 am PST


Updated Thursday, December 27 2018 @ 2:37:50 am PST
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Any decisions made?
Is there a timetable for implementation?
Benchwarmer
Joined: 01/06/2015
Posts: 445

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
@Luiz, I believe it has been stated before that trading will not be implemented as there are to many possibilities for rigging/gaming the system.
nojosdad5
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 12

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I don't have any great fix, but something needs to be done. I'm on my 12th season, and I've yet to draft a player that ends up being a stud. I don't expect to get a great player every year, but you'd think I would have drafted 1 by shear luck by now. My 1st round pick this year, http://brokenbat.org/player/191976, turned out to have a POT of 9. If my scouts believe he had a 9 POT, that player shouldn't even be an option until the 8tb round or so. Every choice I had was only an above average POT, and it's the 1st round.
Also, it seems like most every pitcher I've seen lately says he will always have poor control.
Basically the same type issues others are reporting. It would be nice if you could go to the players page and see a projection of what values that player may have in his prime. Not that those values would be accurate. He could end up better or worse depending on your managers player development, when you advance him through the minors or even just randomly. Basically, it seems like to much guess work. You should know more about the prospects you're looking at. Otherwise, you might as well have the computer randomly assign players to the teams.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

You should know more about the prospects you're looking at. Otherwise, you might as well have the computer randomly assign players to the teams.



That post was very good and it had a perfect summary statement. Nice job. I completely agree.
Holmes
Joined: 11/07/2013
Posts: 1175

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I really only have one strong wish to add here, especially when looking at real life baseball today:
Don't reward teams for being bad!
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
@Holmes
I agree!

Random is better than supporting poor performance.

I've retooled twice and expected to gain in experience for the losses I got. That's just part of it.
allen54chevy
Joined: 11/22/2015
Posts: 475

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Another change that would be benificial would be to bring draft round 1 and 2 closer together. They are 13 days apart which is agonising.
hurstdm
Joined: 01/18/2017
Posts: 576

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
One thing constraining this discussion is that we don't have any standard about what makes a draft for a team "good" or "lucky". It's difficult to know if you're drafting well or poorly. Some teams complaining about the draft might have very normal drafts. Teams might not know how good/bad or lucky/unlucky they are. So I did some research.

I checked every team that responded to this thread. The format for the chart is:

TEAM NAME: 150, 60 (40%), 15(10%)

The first number represents the total number of draft picks that were made by the team in the last 15 seasons. This includes 2024-2038, but not 2023 or 2039. The maximum number is 150.

The second number represents players drafted by the team who are currently on the roster of any team in Broken Bat, along with the percentage of the the total. Somebody found the player valuable enough for a roster spot. In my opinion, this "Hit Rate" percentage is the best way to judge whether a team had "good" or "bad" drafts over any time period.

The third number represents players who stayed on the team's roster as a Home Grown player, followed by the percentage of the total. The team found this player good enough to keep. You could make an argument that this percentage is a better way to judge "good" or "bad" drafts, except that the keep/cut decision can be subjective and relies on lots of factors. It also seems like some managers just prefer to keep a very high percentage of Home Grown players.

Here's the full list:

Solana Beach Palms: 128, 58 (45%), 45 (35%)
Haverhill Halflings: 149, 49 (33%), 20 (13%)
Corvalis Ravens: 134, 48% (36%), 22 (16%)
Tucson Stallions: 98, 34 (35%), 28 (29%)
Chesapeake Gulls: 67, 27 (40%), 18 (27%)
College Station Athletics: 150, 64 (43%), 28 (19%)
Apple Valley Raccoons: 150, 62 (41%), 44 (29%)
Waterloo Dinosaurs: 150, 63 (42%), 28 (19%)
Colorado Springs Condors: 129, 46 (36%), 27 (21%)
Gulfport Mercury: 135, 45 (33%), 20 (15%)
Missoula Polar Bears: 150, 67 (45%), 17 (11%)
Murfreesboro Moo Cows: 100, 28 (28%), 10 (10%)
St. Peters Cardinals: 150, 67 (45%), 32 (21%)
Allen '54 Chevy: 121, 41 (34%), 23 (19%)
Yukon Twisters: 110, 47 (43%), 41 (37%)
Scranton Bears: 143, 58 (41%), 27 (19%)
Shamokin Dopes: 63, 21 (33%), 16 (25%)
Novi Doubledays: 139, 64 (43%), 24 (17%)
Grand Forks Frogs: 122, 42 (34%), 18 (15%)
Dayton Hawks: 142, 60 (42%), 28 (20%)
Minneapolis Tigers: 149, 48 (32%), 29 (19%)
Anapolis Patriots: 150, 56 (37%), 15 (10%)
Margate Magicians: 138, 57 (41%), 27 (20%)
Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers: 150, 63 (42%), 33 (22%)
Harrisonburg Hydrogen: 145, 55 (38%), 34 (23%)
New York Lancers: 125, 56 (45%), 31 (25%)
Berwyn Bikers: 108, 42 (39%), 27 (25%)
Indianapolis Big Rigs: 125, 46 (37%), 21 (17%)
Independence Americans: 85, 30 (35%), 21 (25%)
Deadwood Ambulators: 111, 31 (28%), 13 (12%)
Commerce City Night Bees: 139, 39 (28%), 21 (15%)
Cleveland Thunder: 145, 58 (40%), 44 (30%)
Brick Bombers: 100, 34 (34%), 8 (8%)
Eagan Turtles: 109, 37 (34%), 19 (17%)
Alexandria Athletics: 130, 52 (40%), 26 (20%)
Hood River Hawks: 147, 49 (33%), 18 (12%)
Urbana Cubs: 119, 51 (43%), 41 (34%)
Harrisburg Pioneers: 69, 21 (30%), 17 (25%)
Tuskegee Red Tails: 128, 41 (32%), 35 (27%)
Walla Walla Wolverines: 124, 47 (38%), 27 (22%)
Waipahu Indians: 136, 53 (39%), 21 (15%)
Baytown Bombers: 150, 50 (40%), 38 (25%)
Walnut Creek Aces: 106, 34 (32%), 25 (24%)
Boynton Beach Badgers: 106, 36 (34%), 13 (12%)
Bowie Blue Crabs: 149, 49 (33%), 37 (25%)
Arizona City Phoenix: 137, 57 (42%), 27 (20%)
Columbus Patriots: 148, 55 (37%), 29 (20%)
Asheville Arch-Angels: 117, 45 (38%), 22 (19%)
Manhattan Isotopes: 150, 65 (43%), 26 (17%)

Whew! What can we learn from this?

I'd guess that teams closer to 150 picks tend to be better quality teams. Here are the teams with 148+ picks in 15 years:

Haverhill Halflings: 149, 49 (33%), 20 (13%)
College Station Athletics: 150, 64 (43%), 28 (19%)
Apple Valley Raccoons: 150, 62 (41%), 44 (29%)
Waterloo Dinosaurs: 150, 63 (42%), 28 (19%)
Missoula Polar Bears: 150, 67 (45%), 17 (11%)
St. Peters Cardinals: 150, 67 (45%), 32 (21%)
Minneapolis Tigers: 149, 48 (32%), 29 (19%)
Anapolis Patriots: 150, 56 (37%), 15 (10%)
Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers: 150, 63 (42%), 33 (22%)
Baytown Bombers: 150, 50 (40%), 38 (25%)
Bowie Blue Crabs: 149, 49 (33%), 37 (25%)
Columbus Patriots: 148, 55 (37%), 29 (20%)
Manhattan Isotopes: 150, 65 (43%), 26 (17%)

Here are teams with low numbers of draft picks:

Tucson Stallions: 98, 34 (35%), 28 (29%)
Chesapeake Gulls: 67, 27 (40%), 18 (27%)
Murfreesboro Moo Cows: 100, 28 (28%), 10 (10%)
Shamokin Dopes: 63, 21 (33%), 16 (25%)
Independence Americans: 85, 30 (35%), 21 (25%)
Brick Bombers: 100, 34 (34%), 8 (8%)
Harrisburg Pioneers: 69, 21 (30%), 17 (25%)

I'd also guess that a "Hit Rate" over 40% represents a "good" drafting (or lucky) team. That's 4 picks out of 10 every year that someone found room for on a roster. I think this is the list you want to be on:

Solana Beach Palms: 128, 58 (45%), 45 (35%)
Chesapeake Gulls: 67, 27 (40%), 18 (27%)
College Station Athletics: 150, 64 (43%), 28 (19%)
Apple Valley Raccoons: 150, 62 (41%), 44 (29%)
Waterloo Dinosaurs: 150, 63 (42%), 28 (19%)
Missoula Polar Bears: 150, 67 (45%), 17 (11%)
St. Peters Cardinals: 150, 67 (45%), 32 (21%)
Yukon Twisters: 110, 47 (43%), 41 (37%)
Scranton Bears: 143, 58 (41%), 27 (19%)
Novi Doubledays: 139, 64 (43%), 24 (17%)
Dayton Hawks: 142, 60 (42%), 28 (20%)
Margate Magicians: 138, 57 (41%), 27 (20%)
Kalamazoo Bloody Tigers: 150, 63 (42%), 33 (22%)
New York Lancers: 125, 56 (45%), 31 (25%)
Cleveland Thunder: 145, 58 (40%), 44 (30%)
Alexandria Athletics: 130, 52 (40%), 26 (20%)
Urbana Cubs: 119, 51 (43%), 41 (34%)
Baytown Bombers: 150, 50 (40%), 38 (25%)
Arizona City Phoenix: 137, 57 (42%), 27 (20%)
Manhattan Isotopes: 150, 65 (43%), 26 (17%)

One caveat is that a few of those teams may have a tendency to hoard their own draft picks (E.g., Solana, Apple Valley, Yukon). This might inflate their "Hit Rate".

Here's the list you don't want to be on. It could suggest bad draft strategy or a run of bad luck. I took over in 2035, but the Moo Cows are sadly at the very bottom:

Haverhill Halflings: 149, 49 (33%), 20 (13%)
Gulfport Mercury: 135, 45 (33%), 20 (15%)
Murfreesboro Moo Cows: 100, 28 (28%), 10 (10%)
Shamokin Dopes: 63, 21 (33%), 16 (25%)
Minneapolis Tigers: 149, 48 (32%), 29 (19%)
Deadwood Ambulators: 111, 31 (28%), 13 (12%)
Commerce City Night Bees: 139, 39 (28%), 21 (15%)
Hood River Hawks: 147, 49 (33%), 18 (12%)
Harrisburg Pioneers: 69, 21 (30%), 17 (25%)
Tuskegee Red Tails: 128, 41 (32%), 35 (27%)
Walnut Creek Aces: 106, 34 (32%), 25 (24%)
Bowie Blue Crabs: 149, 49 (33%), 37 (25%)

Hit Rates run from 28% to 45%. I think an average team should have a Hit Rate of around 37%. That's 3-4 draft picks that work out (for somebody) every year, if the team drafts 10 players. A bad rate is 2-3 per year and a good rate is 4-5 per year. There's my first attempt to define a "normal" draft.

Another note: Based on this post, I checked a Broken Bat team that may never have been owned. The point was to check how the human players compare to the AI:
Newport Beach Vikings: 93, 47 (51%), 43 (46%)

I was shocked to find out that the Broken Bat AI doesn't draft in every round. I was also shocked to find out that Newport Beach has the highest "Hit Rate" (51%) of any team I checked! But this is probably due to a tendency to hoard its own draft picks and not through any kind of superior drafting. I bet no one's ever weeded these players out!

Why does this matter in a thread about changing the draft? Because maybe Broken Bat owners are doing better than you think you are. Or maybe you're not. This might take some guesswork out of whether your team is succeeding. I can hear it in the forums now, "My draft may be bad, but at least it's not MOO COW bad."

I still vote to leave the draft largely the same. Nudges, not an overhaul.
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Nice tabulating!

I think one thing that (I think) is worth keeping in mind about numbers like these are that the better your organization is, or perhaps more accurately the longer your team has been a quality organization, the more likely you will have released a decent draft pick because your organization already has *even better* players in their system... so those players wind up on other people's active rosters because those other organizations *aren't* as deep or established, and therefore those players represent a quality roster spot to them, but not necessarily to the drafting team.

In other words, the second number (a draft pick that is on SOME organization's roster) is probably more reflective of the quality of the pick, rather than the third number, which can be lower for deeper/more mature organizations.
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Also, with all of Rock777's signs of unlucky drafting, I was very surprised to find that my percentages were lower than his. So clearly I'm getting shafted ;)
Frankebasta
Joined: 09/15/2013
Posts: 881

Kodiak Mules
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
One more great job done about what happens in this game.
Great idea!

Laredo numbers are:
148 - 60 (40%) - 24 (16%)

comments: I intentionally skipped 2 9th round drafts;
the actual number of homegrown players would be 26 (17%), two were cut last season for being too old
hurstdm
Joined: 01/18/2017
Posts: 576

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I noticed this pattern! What's with people intentionally skipping the 9th round of the draft? Check out the Novi drafts! I think all the recent Novi 9th rounds get skipped. Color me befuddled.
Frankebasta
Joined: 09/15/2013
Posts: 881

Kodiak Mules
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Chance of finding a keeper in the 9th round as .001
So I better keep a known player on my 50 man roster.

10th round, however, is near the end of the season.
Most likely the final standings are decided, but even if not, there are less games to play, less chances for injuries, thus I can cut the last of my high-paid old geezers (usually, a Rental player).

That's why I draft in the 10th, but skip the 9th: salary reduction
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Yeah that is always a consideration for round 9 and 10. Unlikely to get a keeper, and unable to sign any free agents / waivers.

Nope, your data didn't make me feel like I was doing any better than I expected, LOL.

Worth noting for some teams that haven't been owned for the last 15 years, that bots have a tendency to draft pretty poorly. I might be completely random.

Updated Friday, December 28 2018 @ 3:47:38 pm PST
Benchwarmer
Joined: 01/06/2015
Posts: 445

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Wow, that is quite the table! Nice analysis, although I'd be interested to know what league level each team is vs. the % on their roster. As a couple of others point out, what is considered quality differs from league to league. There are some intangibles in there like owner preferences and how long you keep your older players vs. younger blood. Although the overall % on a roster is pretty useful data, apparently I do indeed have a below average draft! But 1 in 4 that stay on my roster isn't bad, particularly since I tend to pick up a few guys that tend to be longer term players (4+ years) on the waiver wire. I wonder how this holds up game-wide, as we only have about 6% of teams on this list.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
It is nice work, but it doesn't really capture quality. Only the cut line of guys who are good enough to make some roster. Could be those are POT 12s barely sitting a bench, or they could be POT 14s in a starting lineup. I for one have never drafted a player higher than POT 14. One good POT 15 is worth 10 decent POT 13s, but that won't show in this data.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I would actually prefer a potential ceiling at 14 or maybe 122 SI. Reducing extreme good luck would be an improvement. Doing that wouldn't eliminate ultra stars since players can be noticeably better (or worse) than their displayed skills.
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Nice work on this, hurstdm.

Ninth round falls after waivers close. As Frank points out, ninth round is unlikely to provide a quality prospect.

Instead of taking that pick, I tend to go either one of two ways with that fiftieth roster spot on Sept. 1st. Sometimes I sign a young 12 POT that I think should be on a roster somewhere and "give him a free ride" for the rest of the season. Maybe he doesn't fall through the cracks and gets some training before the big waiver rush at the start of the next season and gets picked up by a lower league team when I release him. If he really wows me, maybe he earns a spot in the minors for the next season with me. Rare, but it happens.

Other seasons, I may pick up a veteran for depth that I'll cut after my last game. Either way I've decided to go, somebody gets cut which allows me to pick in the tenth round before the flip happens.
FreddyTheEye
Joined: 11/11/2014
Posts: 625

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I would actually prefer a potential ceiling at 14 or maybe 122 SI. Reducing extreme good luck would be an improvement. Doing that wouldn't eliminate ultra stars since players can be noticeably better (or worse) than their displayed skills.

+1
Meccanodonte
Joined: 04/21/2014
Posts: 370

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Enormous work, but has little senso to me, addressing the problem at least.
In fact, I'm in the "lucky" teams, despite I have picked only one more than POT13 since 2034 and he'll be a backup player b/c of low hitting skill (for the previous POT14 I have to go to 2031 season).

Furthermore, I've skipped many times the last 2-3 pick of the year, preferring the known over the unknown (and probably bad), so the % of retained picks is inflated.
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
hurstdm

Thanks for all the work!
Interesting data.
Hit % from good to bad isn't as large as I expected on 1st look through your calcs.

I tend to draft college to reduce roster requirements for developing players. Thus my draft pool is smaller sooner (I think) and less 'hits" earlier in draft sequence. Clarify, pool depleted at 7 rather than 9?

Those who draft High School hold their "Hits" longer for development and when dropped, MAY have developed a player for another team's Waiver "Hit". These HS Hits are in the dbase 5 or more years longer than College (est 33% longer).

Concl- Those who draft a lot of HS players will have middle number, Hit%, higher than those who draft only college. Clarify - Equal players but one with 5 more years service on a roster.

Thanks for putting this together, hurstdm

Updated Saturday, December 29 2018 @ 8:55:15 am PST


Updated Saturday, December 29 2018 @ 8:58:31 am PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I draft a lot of HS players... Hasn't helped my "hit rate".
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

@Rock777

Just saying it should inflate the number of seasons your pick is counted in this model when he is
added to your/other roster. Career of 17/18-35 vs 22/23-35.

Sadly we both "Hit" at 33%.
Longviewess
Joined: 09/23/2018
Posts: 111

Frederick Keys
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
It does make sense that more draft picks made will lead to a greater opportunity to be a successful team. The draft is the only reliable method to add to your roster since the waiver wire is a complete waste of time since the success rate of claims is so low.

I've only had this team for 3 months but seeing this data and exploring the draft history of my team does explain a few things.

1) There was a 3 season run from 2027-2029 when only 2 of a possible 30 draft picks were used despite being controlled by human players. Those drafts should theoretically be forming the core of my Major League roster right now.

However, since no players are left from those years, my team is stuck losing a lot of games while building the talent base back up.

2) The two 15 talent players in my minors were selected by bots not humans.

3) That gets balanced out by 2032 when the bot in control selected:

2 - 7 Potential players
1 - 8 Potential player
1 - 9 Potential player
1 - 10 Potential player
1 - 11 Potential player
1 - 12 Potential player
quanin
Joined: 03/16/2016
Posts: 196

Cleveland Thunder
IV.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Hey, I did better than I thought. Nice.

What this tells me is the problem isn't so much the draft, but with the quality/viability of players available. Players that aren't anywhere close to the positions they were assigned at draft time, or players who's scouting report doesn't reflect the current draft round (No scouting report in round 1? Really?).

This player was drafted during the range Hurstdm was researching. I kept him because I like him, but he's an OF now. When I drafted him, he was a 3B. That is not a 3B build. That, I think, is the core of the problem if there's a problem.

Updated Saturday, December 29 2018 @ 6:21:53 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Agreed. I have had many a first rounds where my best option was "Above Average Potential." Seems quite silly. I think either of the two main options presented would fix this problem. And player position templates would fix the position issue.

Wow... Starting off with two POT 15s in your system...! I've been playing this game for a long time, and I've never drafted a POT 15. Two from the get-go is a pretty nice start :)
Longviewess
Joined: 09/23/2018
Posts: 111

Frederick Keys
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
@Rock777

Very fortunate to have them in my system. Both were selected when my team was under bot control so they are examples of how the bot can randomly select quality players.

Also, one has a never be a decent hitter report which I understand is not ideal.
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I disagree... the waivers are definitely not a complete waste of time.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Agree with Wickersty. And we should know given our horrible draft luck; our teams are built almost entirely from waivers ;)
Longviewess
Joined: 09/23/2018
Posts: 111

Frederick Keys
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
The waiver wire looks to me like a total lottery. No skill involved, just random luck of the draw. For every team that has success on the wire, there is another who is 0-50 like I am so far this season.

At least with the draft I have some control over who I add to my team. Many of the suggestions in this thread would enhance the draft and make it an even more valuable tool.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I have a number of core players on my squad that I won on waivers who only had 1-3 claims on them. That is where the skill comes in. Identifying talented players no one else sees. Sure the 90 claim guys are pure luck, but no team will have success if it depends on claiming 90 claim waivers.
lostraven
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 1269

Corvallis Ravens
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
^--- 100 percent this! I've had some great one- and two-claim players over the years.
Longviewess
Joined: 09/23/2018
Posts: 111

Frederick Keys
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
I get that point on idetifying players. Still doesn't change the fact that winning anything more than a 1 claim player is nothing more than a lottery.

I haven't even been able to win a 2 claim coin flip so far this year (lost 2 of those in the most recent waiver run actually).

My larger point is that I agree with subtle changes to the draft to enhance its viability since it is the only avenue available that a manager has full control over deciding who to add to their roster.

My team is a case in point of how not using the draft properly can hurt. A total of 2 selections made in the 3 seasons that should be forming the core of my team right now. That has exposed me to using the waiver wire to fill out a roster while trying to rebuild what was an old, high salary and nearly bankrupt team when I took it over.

I don't mind losing in the short-term for a payoff in the long-run. But it is much harder and very frustrating when you aren't having any sucess in one of the only two ways to add to your roster.
JJNZ
Joined: 12/09/2014
Posts: 1580

Yakima Monster
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Another thought I just had - once prospects are drafted we get an estimation of when they will likely be ready for the majors, should this be part of the draft also? I.e. you have two 'Very Good potential' college pitchers, one forecast for 2040, the other for 2042 - depending on the state of your team, it may effect which of the two you choose - we've all had those players who look good on paper but come out with very low starting SI.
GrizzlyDan
Joined: 06/30/2016
Posts: 199

Atlanta Braves
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm not going to be the guy that complains about the waiver wire, especially since I just astoundingly won the Atkinson sweepstakes. It's a classic case of "You can't win if you don't play." You don't want to rely on it too much, but when you win a good one, it can change the whole complexion of your year. Atkinson is by far the biggest marquee FA in my franchise history.
Longviewess
Joined: 09/23/2018
Posts: 111

Frederick Keys
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
An idea popped into my head that I figured I would put out there for consideration in this discussion

What about adding a new position to the game as a way to implement some subtle changes to the draft. This new position could be called the Scouting Director (which exists for all MLB franchises) and could be implemented using much of the same mechanics as the Manager and Training systems.

For example, the Scouting Director could have four scouting attributes that would be revealed over time like the attributes of the Manager.

1) Offense – How well they identify draft prospects with offensive potential.

2) Pitching – How well they identify draft prospects with pitching potential.

3) Defense – How well they identify draft prospects with good defensive skills.

4) Potential – How well they identify draft prospects with high potential.

This position could be connected with a new draft feature that functions like the Primary/Secondary Training options in the Training tab.

Each week a GM could have the Scouting Director focus on a Primary and Secondary Scouting attribute that would have a slight impact on the type of draft prospects that would be pulled for a GM to choose from. Options to focus on could be broad like:

1) Offense
2) Defense
3) Pitching
4) Potential

Or they could be skill specific like:

1) Hitting
2) Power
3) Speed
4) Range
5) Arm
6) Fastball
7) Breaking Ball
8) Control
9) Stamina
10) Potential

This way the mechanics of the new feature would be very similar to what already exists in BB. It would also keep some of the mystery in the game by not making every piece of information available at once.

GM’s would have a better opportunity to control the composition of the draftees they choose from each week. It would also add another level of decision-making intrigue. Pitching or offense? Potential or a specific skill?

The one downside that comes to mind is that some parts the draft pool could be depleted very quickly.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
My fear is that this would end up being implemented like the Managers were and just decrease parity in the draft even further than it is right now. Some people would have really good Scouting Directors and get all the good picks, while others would get stuck with sucky Directors and leftovers.
Meccanodonte
Joined: 04/21/2014
Posts: 370

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I agree with Rock.
The idea is good, but the way the managers' selection works will essentially shift the luck/randomness problem from an area to another one, worsening the problem instead of resolving.
Valmion
Joined: 10/16/2015
Posts: 70

Port Arthur Pirates
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
My two cents....

Draft:

Something needs to change, as the quality of players coming out of the draft cannot sustain a competitive team. I don't think further discussion is needed here, as all of you have covered it's downside quite well in the posts above.

Waivers:

Here is where I think there should be a change. Right now, it's all about luck, nothing but simple luck. How about this idea for a change. Player associated teams are set in a random order to start, then when a team claims a waiver, they fall to the bottom of the list. So say a player gets 30 claims on him, the team highest on the waiver list claims him then drops to the bottom of the list. I think this simple change to the waiver claims would make the game more competitive overall.

RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Seeing a lot of complex fixes.

Major concerns seem to be
1- player quality,
2- players to fit my needs
3- must draft early for "fair access".

1 - Tweak ability spread up. Even effect for all but gives us more VGs etc.

2 - Increase from 10 per round. Reams written on how to draft for postion with current ratings. Use these "hints" on more players per round.

3 - Different weekly pool for each team. Freeze till next week then release back to pool if not taken. One can evaluate options any time during the week and not lose a shared player when someone else takes him.

Seems simpler to code compared to some and addresses what I see as problems represented above.

Please, nothing like the Manager selection process.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Actually, that is both more complex and less effective than just going the dynamic player creation route I suggested. Increasing ability across the board just creates inflation and doesn't fix anything.

Dynamic Player generation (quality by round) instead of shared pools, plus position templates fix all the problems mentioned and are super simple to implement. Also very user friendly. Not complex at all.

@Valmion - Interesting idea on waivers. Teams would need to choose between claiming lots of good players, or saving up for a super star. There would be a LOT more players going through to FA. You really going to waste your claim on a 5 claim player when its that valuable? Possibly a rich get richer thing though... Probably needs a lot more discussion. We really should be discussing waivers in a different thread.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Wow...lots to digest here.

Steve
GullyFoyle
Joined: 02/16/2016
Posts: 129

Spokane Wolves
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
A thought just occurred to me while reading these posts. I think its related to some earlier posts regarding increasing the number of draftees we see when we select which pool to choose from.

My thought was that we could have a set number of draftees we could look at in a season (eg:150). But we can choose how many to look at each week, I was thinking we could pick from 10 to 20 (or perhaps more or less on both ends, I'm not married to the numbers). It would be possible to go through your total in 8 or 9 rounds and you could choose to not even draft in 9 or 10.

This seems a solution which would improve your first few rounds without a drastic change to how the pools currently work.

Another solution might be to allow increased size of player pools by paying for them, via a scouting department, rather than having a scouting director as suggested earlier.
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
I like the direction of GullyFoyle's thinking here. Some sort of strategic investment overlaying the current system would help people feel a little more in control without making drastic changes necessary. One thing the current draft is definitely missing is an investment/reward aspect.
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
@ROCK777

Dynamic Player generation (quality by round) instead of shared pools, plus position templates fix all the problems mentioned and are super simple to implement.

I looked through for a definition of Dynamic Player generation without success.
Can you explain please?
I'm all for simple and user friendly.

Updated Thursday, January 3 2019 @ 8:38:49 am PST

Does this mean in Round 1 I get a 14 and I select Pitcher? System generates 1 for me?
Round 2 I get a 13 and system generates one for me?
Thus no pools.

Updated Thursday, January 3 2019 @ 8:52:43 am PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Close, it does mean that there are no pools. You pick a pool (College, Asian, etc.), and then you are presented with 10 (or 20) players just like now. The main difference is instead of having all of the pseudo players (they aren't actually created until someone drafts them) in one giant shared pool, your pool of 10 (or 20) guys are generated on the spot for only your team. This means there is no early bird advantage since everyone's pool is seeded with the same potential talent level.

Reality is, the shared pools don't really give us anything except for a few problems (e.g. losing players off draft boards). Especially given we don't have much control over which portion of players we draw. Minds well not be shared. Then everyone has equal odds, and the talent level can be finely controlled per round.

The user experience looks identical to our existing mechanism from the player perspective, but the results (parity/control) are much improved.

If desired, Steve could even still have pool sizes like we do right now. A lot of people have already drafted from College? Well that just ratchets down the odds of picking a sleeper from that pool. Maybe even slightly reduces the quality of players from that pool. Pools can also still have the same player generation influences they have today. The only difference is when the "prospect" players are created. Everything else can work the same, and the actual player generation (after drafting) would be identical.

Then for some additional effect, we could add other simple fixes like picking by position (would be easier to do with randomly generated pools), and position templates. The idea with position templates is that players would actually be feasible (if not great) at their advertised positions. Bundled with the ability to choose your position, would greatly enhance our control over who we are drafting.

If this second option was used, the only change on the front-end side would be an additional option to choose a position when you draft. So even with both of these suggestions combined you are talking about minimal development effort, and virtually no front-end experience change.

I have heard folks express concerns that everyone would just draft Pitchers.
1) I don't believe that is true, I certainly wouldn't. And if I did, they wouldn't be SPs.
2) The bots will still draft for need, if human players cause a glut in one area, the bots are likely to draft more infielders to compensate for the lack of FA
3) Other than pitcher/fielder, most people reposition their players anyhow. If you weren't wise enough to draft any 2B, you'll just have to convert some OF into 2B. Problem solved.

Combining these two methods together might create some skill inflation. One possible solution would be to give people the option to pick (Any, Fielder, Pitcher, or specific positions). The more specific you get, the more disparity (wider downside) you get in your presented options. This emulates the fact that if you just focus on the best player for the first round you might have to choose a position you don't need so badly, but in later rounds you might prefer to specifically pick up a 2B even if it means lower odds of getting the best possible player.


Updated Thursday, January 3 2019 @ 8:05:08 pm PST
Holmes
Joined: 11/07/2013
Posts: 1175

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Rock, I like your way of thinking. The rat race to be among the first to pick in the first round is indeed annoying. The challenging thing on the concept development side would be to emulate the qualitative depletion of draft pools from round to round (while the primary aim of the exercise is to not have qualitative depletion during a round for fairness reasons).
I don't think we even need the ability to draft by position, though. Just having the players' skills fit their advertised positions a little better (and maybe showing if someone is a starting or relief pitcher) would be just fine. Currently, prospect positions are totally meaningless, unless we're talking Asians who don't have time to learn a new position in the minors. It is a tad ridiculous to draft a shortstop and then find he has a 7 range and 5 arm. High school coaches aren't total idiots.
allen54chevy
Joined: 11/22/2015
Posts: 475

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Round 2 draft: High School
Only 1 pitcher available. He had no scouting report.

Only a few position players with "good" reports. One had only good... no other qualifiers. One looked like an ok catcher prospect, the other looked like a middle infielder who cannot hit.

Grabbed the "good" Catcher prospect who turned out to be 11 pot.

This is where the problem is.

Early rounds (especially 1 and 2) are too much of a dice roll and the descriptions of good leading to a pot11 means the kid was completely miss scouted.

I am not saying everyone should get a pot 14 everytime... but maybe a floor for the first 2 rounds would be a good idea. The floor doesn't even have to be high. Pot 12 in first round and pot 11 in the second would probably work. Half of my options today likely would have not made an 11 floor.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
@Holmes - I agree, if we pumped up the number of option to 20 and used position templates it would really make drafting by position extraneous.

I think it would be pretty straight forward to emulate the qualitative depletion of draft pools. Steve can define the quality range per round. So maybe the first round has all POT 12 - 16 players. The second round, the quality ramps down, and there are only POT 11 - POT 14 players, etc. Could still be sleepers, but its all a numbers game. If Steve knows the current percentages, he can easily translate them into quality production numbers per round.






Updated Friday, January 4 2019 @ 4:22:32 pm PST
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Thanks
Rock, Holmes and Chevy...
Sounds reasonable to me, and better.
Generate single player draft options (10-20) based on requested pool.
Better player fit to advertised position.
Floor to avoid drafting 11/10s early.
Option to go for pitchers/fielders or all.
Thanks guys!
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm on board. We'll see if Steve is.
Philliesworld
Joined: 10/17/2014
Posts: 785

Blacksburg Bulldogs
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Progress......

I'm still intrigued by the idea of completely hiding potential...It brings a lot of considerations to the table.

Today's draft has again reinforced the idea that the current draft is not good. No matter what people say.

I had four very goods, and several very intriguing goods... I ended up drafting a stud. In the meanwhile there's managers with a draft board that is lacking any semblance of talent. How the neck can that possibly be fair? This has nothing to do with making strategic decisions. Only making the best choice in a crap shoot.

Updated Friday, January 4 2019 @ 5:13:19 pm PST
Longviewess
Joined: 09/23/2018
Posts: 111

Frederick Keys
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
@Philliesworld

Those are two very impressive draft picks. Congrats!
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
I had four very goods, and several very intriguing goods... I ended up drafting a stud. In the meanwhile there's managers with a draft board that is lacking any semblance of talent. How the neck can that possibly be fair? This has nothing to do with making strategic decisions. Only making the best choice in a crap shoot.

I think this sums up the current situation in a nutshell. Change is necessary.

And congrats PW on landing the "Clay-maker"!
Hayseed
Joined: 02/20/2018
Posts: 289

Hood River Hawks
V.2

Broken Bat Baseball
^!!
Philliesworld
Joined: 10/17/2014
Posts: 785

Blacksburg Bulldogs
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Thanks longviewess and almaric.

"Clay-maker" I like it... I also like D.C. (Dylan Clay). He said his favorite shoes are DC's. He's also a DC guy, says he's the "marvel".

Updated Saturday, January 5 2019 @ 12:41:44 pm PST
Rome
Joined: 06/01/2016
Posts: 24

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
The way SimYard did it was perfect. Each league had it's own pool, draft snaked starting with worst team first. Of course owners had to manage minor league team depending on if they paid for them.
knoxvol
Joined: 04/16/2018
Posts: 61

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Yeah SimYard was great. Never paid to be in one of the leagues but the free options were still pretty fun. I actually stumbled upon BB trying to find a SimYard replacement!

Doesn't the unpredictable draft-pool quality that folks are frustrated with affect everyone? Just like changes to make the quality of early round prospects more consistent would help everyone?

In other words, does getting more +13 POT prospects really help you if your opponents get them as well?

Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
The problem is some people get nothing but "Above Average" options in the first round. If I'm currently drafting POT 11s in the first round, and my opponents are drafting POT 15s, then yes. Definitely a leg up for me if everyone was drafting POT 13s.

I've been playing this game for 20 seasons and I've never drafted a player higher than POT 14 (and not too many of those). Some folks have drafted two or three POT 15s in a single season. Also, as it is right now, its been proven that the first people to draft have better odds. So if you draft an hour or two after the new round starts, you get the dregs.

It's not as simple as just increasing the number of POT 13s.


Updated Friday, January 11 2019 @ 7:56:43 pm PST
GullyFoyle
Joined: 02/16/2016
Posts: 129

Spokane Wolves
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball

Also, as it is right now, its been proven that the first people to draft have better odds. So if you draft an hour or two after the new round starts, you get the dregs.


I'm in England, so I'm probably one of the earliest to draft so I have to say I agree with this. Its probably one of the bigger problems. Admittedly for everyone else, not for me, but I'm in favour of fairness and currently I'm certainly receiving an advantage.

Oddly though my two 15 pot draftees both came in the third round but I don't think I can remember the last time I got a poor board for the first round. I've taken a couple of 11 pot players in round 1 but both had good potential on their report.

I think its right to say though that any system that gives advantage to anyone (even me) isn't fair.

MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
While I think the draft race is bad, I dislike the other aspects of the current draft system even more.
Rome
Joined: 06/01/2016
Posts: 24

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I also think if teams are able to recruit players they can recruit players more adapt to their ballpark. Speed vs Power. Big Park vs Small Park. Pitcher Friendly vs Hitter friendly.
hurstdm
Joined: 01/18/2017
Posts: 576

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I bet the majority of Broken Bat players are in the Pacific time zone, Eastern time zone, or around Greenwich Mean Time. Could the code be written with a hard draft time every Friday of something like 9:00am Pacific time? That would be noon Eastern time and around 6:00pm for our European friends. Solidly daytime for the majority of players. Would anytime in the morning 9-12 Pacific time be more generally fair than the 5-6am it is now?
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
Would anytime in the morning 9-12 Pacific time be more generally fair than the 5-6 AM now?

I'm not against changing the draft time. But it's not going to affect anything. Round 1 already opens at that time and on a Saturday. That's about as neutral as it gets.

The whole time thing is overblown.
Rome
Joined: 06/01/2016
Posts: 24

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I joined the Hardwood site a took up a team. I like how the recruiting works there. I think it would do great here.

I just wonder how it would work. Since players can be on a team for up to 20+ seasons would a player contract term need to be put in place? Say a team drafts a player. That player would be locked into that team for 6 seasons before they can be released. This way teams are not just recruiting players and dropping them the next season. Also FA's should have the same thing but maybe 4 year term contracts.
Deuce
Joined: 06/07/2016
Posts: 279

New London Rippers
V.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Current system is good and 3 million games simmed is a kind of proof of that. Please don't change this wonderful and simple game!
buffmckagan
Joined: 12/22/2013
Posts: 650

Scranton Bears
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
When will we know what changes will be made (if any)?
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
My original idea kind of got shot down, so I'm still evaluating what changes to make.

I know there is a sense that Broken Bat has become a little stale and there isn't much strategy to drafting nor really a good way to shape your team with it. So I'd like to improve that some.


Steve
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I don’t think it’s stale Steve. I log in several times a day, every day, and have been since 2032. I think changing too much will hurt the game. Don’t be like Manfred! Be careful!

:)
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I appreciate you getting input from players, Steve. I'll say this, though, you'll never make everyone happy. You do your best and that's all you can do. When you see people whining, myself including, judge and weigh the validity of the complaint, go from there.

Keep up the good work. I'm sure you'll figure out something that you like for the draft. Big, big, big kudos to you for your active involvement in the forums. I've never played an online game where the developer has been in the middle of group talk like you are. It's awesome. Thanks.

Updated Thursday, February 14 2019 @ 2:51:30 am PST
wuggla
Joined: 05/10/2013
Posts: 1058

Colorado Springs Vultures
V.14

Broken Bat Baseball
Steve look at my draft history please. I think draft works fine.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Steve look at my draft history please. I think draft does not work fine.
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Greatest back to back posts in BB history
Hayseed
Joined: 02/20/2018
Posts: 289

Hood River Hawks
V.2

Broken Bat Baseball
Steve look at my draft history please. I think draft does not work fine.

It definitely has NOT worked fine for me.

I really want to 2nd some of MMike's comments of appreciation for Steve and his attention to our frustrations. Thanks. BB is still good, but the draft is its biggest problem and I am glad that you are addressing it.

Yes, the draft should have some more strategy in it. A larger pool, a chance to chose positions of need or some of the other ideas that were mentioned might help. But whatever you chose to change, it must be more fair. Living on the west coast shouldn't be a penalty.
hockeytrb99
Joined: 07/11/2015
Posts: 38

Sandusky Warriors
VI.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Here is my idea for the draft:
1) One pool of prospects that is revealed at the beginning of the season.
2) The teams will be ordered from worst to best rating.
3) The draft will be snake draft style. First pick in first round gets last pick in second round.
4) The computer will pick the best player based on user set parameters.
5) The draft will run continuously for all 10 rounds. X amount of time between each pick.
6) The players picked will not be added to your roster until you sign the player. They will be added to page for drafted players. You will have until the end of the season to sign them if you don't sign them they will be added to the free agent pool.
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
-1, sorry I don't like this at all.

I think the best solution lies in something Rock777 and others have banded about, which is basically changing from a single pre-determined pool, which causes race conditions and penalization to time zone, to using the same algorithm logic but generating the 10 (or 15 or whatever) players that YOU see when you log in to draft, vs the 10 (or 15) that I see, vs the 10 (or 15) that Rock sees, etc.

The ratios on how many good players there are in the pools vs what round the draft is in can either be left alone, or also adjusted, but having the individual pool selections be live-generated per team each round will keep folks from having missed pics because they weren't up at 3am local time to draft.

I'm also not saying that the draft pool sizes don't need to be adjusted, or that the ratio of quality players doesn't need to adjust, or even that the scouting reports don't need adjustment (arm indicators, accuracy of descriptions, etc). But those topics can be additional areas of change, in addition to the idea of something like live-generating the pools per team instead of pre-generated pools for the whole league across all 10 rounds.

I absolutely don't think that the computer should draft for us, or that the computer should determine for us who is a better player vs another player.
lostraven
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 1269

Corvallis Ravens
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
"has become a little stale"

Eh, personally not so much stale; as I've said recently, best baseball sim for me, hands down. Just want a few small tweaks to drafting.

As others have stated, thanks so much for the work you put into this. Indeed, it's nice to see that you're asking questions and poking your nose in on our tomfoolery from time to time.
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
It’s not stale for me! Appreciate whatever you decide to do, but hope it isn’t a major overhaul...
buffmckagan
Joined: 12/22/2013
Posts: 650

Scranton Bears
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
Love this game -- have been an active player since 2016. No major complaints! Keep up the good work.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Here is my idea for the draft:
1) One pool of prospects that is revealed at the beginning of the season.
2) The teams will be ordered from worst to best rating.
3) The draft will be snake draft style. First pick in first round gets last pick in second round.
4) The computer will pick the best player based on user set parameters.
5) The draft will run continuously for all 10 rounds. X amount of time between each pick.
6) The players picked will not be added to your roster until you sign the player. They will be added to page for drafted players. You will have until the end of the season to sign them if you don't sign them they will be added to the free agent pool.


There was a lot of resistance to have a giant draft pool that everyone had to sort through and rank to be successful in Broken Bat.


Steve
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
I like it (and obviously I love this game regardless).

It's a reasonable compromise, given that it's impossibble to please everyone, and while it'll take a little work I have no problem with that. I'll leave it to others to try and shoot holes in it or ask a ton of questions - I'm happy to wait and see how it works. :)
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
This might be a little radical, but how about this: we eliminate the term "Draft" from the game.

The word Draft has a lot of expectations tied up into it. Instead, we could have a "Scouting Department" tab. Each week our scouting department would present us with a list of players they've spent the past week scouting and we would have an opportunity to sign one of these players. Instead of draft rounds we would have "Signing Rounds" 1-10.

If Steve were to decide to go to with slates of potential picks generated for each team weekly instead of the pre-generated pools, we could consider another fun option. Having the slate generated the week before and each day of the week between signing rounds, you would get a report from your scouting department dropping clues about the prospects on the list (better written than these, but you get the idea): "Our head scout had an opportunity to watch a game with So-and-So and his range in the outfield was incredible". "One of our scouts made it out to the ballpark to watch What's His Name in person and he was wowed by his raw power", etc.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm not really a fan of that because it's mostly just playing with words and adding a bit of flavor. It did start me on my path to the radical realm, though...

1. Draftees are completely generated at the outset. (I think this is something that is a requisite of probably any change for the better.)
2. Teams are divided into 50 groups of 15 (16). (How they're grouped could be argued later. It should at least equally distribute owned teams.)
3. The game ranks position players available in the draft by potential SI (not displayed) and snakes the top 750 into the groups. It then does the same for the top 500 pitchers. This creates a draft pool of 15 and 10, respectively, for the grouped teams of 15.
4. The draft list of 25 goes out to the group at draft time and are immediately available. (The choices are listed in random order, not in order of potential SI.)

I'm not quite done yet. To instill a little bit of poker/chicken, interest and strategy, which was inspired by Haselrig's post...

5. As time progresses throughout the week, unchosen position draftees reveal their skills that don't improve with training and experience. Maybe something like range on Sunday, arm on Monday, etc.

Pitchers are more difficult and less exciting to handle in revealing like that because their defensive qualities really don't matter. Maybe their initial pitching skill ratings are revealed day by day? It's not really that important with pitchers because there aren't 8 field positions for them.

Anyway, this radical approach of revealing unmentioned scouting report skills does two things. First, it creates risk/reward by providing more info on your draftees if you wait to get more information on them, which can help you figure out their possible positions before drafting them. Second, it partially eliminates the race-to-draft issue. Yes you can race to draft and pick fast, but you can be rewarded with more information if you wait.

It also vastly improves the complete randomness of draft quality. Everyone gets a somewhat similar player. Rarely will you see bums and superstars be chosen side by side. And if you choose a dud in the early rounds, it's quite possibly your own fault for rushing to pick.

My stab at a somewhat radical proposition. Bludgeon away.

Edit--Obviously none of the numbers are set in stone regarding groupings, position players, pitchers, etc. They are just what I think are reasonable approximations.

Updated Sunday, February 17 2019 @ 6:02:14 am PST
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
I appreciate the thought and effort here. Few thoughts on the suggestions.

2. Obviously I have bias as a high ranked team, but any system that incentivizes losing potentially leads to tanking. (IMO) Tanking smears every single professional sport, and is something that has thankfully been absent from BrokenBat.

Cup success provides ranking. Would this lead to teams tripping over themselves in haste to leave the competition? Signing 30 SI starting pitchers to increase their chances of losing?

3. Talent has tended to thin out towards the end of the second round. It's possible late in the first early in the second is actually better than the reverse.

4. Based on parameters. What I take from this is that the parameters could be left fairly general (best player available) or set more specific (draft by need).

5. Is the time between picks intended to allow you to change draft parameters? (Based on what you picked?).

One of the things I've always liked about the draft here is that the excitement is spread out over the entire season. I look forward to the 1-2 pinch of training and drafting every Friday morning.

The suggested model consolidates all that excitement into a single day. I think it's possible that's less preferable given the length of seasons. Eg., a new human joins in week 2. Under the current system they will be able to make 9 draft picks. Under the suggested system they will have to wait 3 months.

Eg. 2, we see (hot take) posts complaining that a human couldn't be online until 30 minutes after the draft refreshed, and so their pick was trash. Under the new system those posts will be replaced by (much more valid) I was on vacation / had a family emergency didn't set my parameters my whole draft is trash.

6. How does player siigning work with training? Do unsigned players receive training? If so, all players will be left unsigned until the end of the season effectively increasing roster size. If they don't receive training then all draftees should be signed immediately effectively reducing roster size. Blips in roster size have a direct impact on waiver liquidity.

I'm not trying to be negative. Devil's advocate. I enjoy the current system. I think I would enjoy the proposed system. Just trying to think it through.
FreddyTheEye
Joined: 11/11/2014
Posts: 625

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I know there is a sense that Broken Bat has become a little stale and there isn't much strategy to drafting nor really a good way to shape your team with it. So I'd like to improve that some.


So in the new proposal how have any of the issues been solved??:

1) Our "parameter settings" will allow us to draft a SS with fielding/range and arm??
2) There will no longer be a wide range of 10 potential-16 potential players available in the first round?(causing unfair drafts)
Or will drafting first (700-800 spots ahead of a legends team) net a 16 pot while 700th pick gets a 12 pot?
3) Will there be a "best available player" option to draft?

I see massive tanking coming!! haha


If it produces a "more fair first two rounds" and if you can actually shape your team better and if the new draft doesn't guarantee multiple studs for weak teams, then I'm in!! :-)


********************Personally I like the current system with a couple small tweaks:*****************

I would add the ability to see arm and range AND more choices on the board each week. This would even out luck even more and give the ability to draft more by position.
P.S. no longer having an 18 yr old SS drafted with 6 range would also be preferred. (better position scouting)
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I don't like the snake draft for a myriad of reasons already posted. I still think the best solution would be:

You pick a pool (College, Asian, etc.), and then you are presented with 10 (or 20) players just like now. The main difference is instead of having all of the pseudo players (they aren't actually created until someone drafts them) in one giant shared pool, your pool of 10 (or 20) guys are generated on the spot for only your team. This means there is no early bird advantage since everyone's pool is seeded with the same potential talent level.

Reality is, the shared pools don't really give us anything except for a few problems (e.g. losing players off draft boards). Especially given we don't have much control over which portion of players we draw. Minds well not be shared. Then everyone has equal odds, and the talent level can be finely controlled per round.

The user experience looks identical to our existing mechanism from the player perspective, but the results (parity/control) are much improved.

If desired, Steve could even still have pool sizes like we do right now. A lot of people have already drafted from College? Well that just ratchets down the odds of picking a sleeper from that pool. Maybe even slightly reduces the quality of players from that pool. Pools can also still have the same player generation influences they have today. The only difference is when the "prospect" players are created. Everything else can work the same, and the actual player generation (after drafting) would be identical.

Then for some additional effect, we could add other simple fixes like picking by position (would be easier to do with randomly generated pools), and position templates. The idea with position templates is that players would actually be feasible (if not great) at their advertised positions. Bundled with the ability to choose your position, would greatly enhance our control over who we are drafting.

If this second option was used, the only change on the front-end side would be an additional option to choose a position when you draft. So even with both of these suggestions combined you are talking about minimal development effort, and virtually no front-end experience change.

I have heard folks express concerns that everyone would just draft Pitchers.
1) I don't believe that is true, I certainly wouldn't. And if I did, they wouldn't be SPs.
2) The bots will still draft for need, if human players cause a glut in one area, the bots are likely to draft more infielders to compensate for the lack of FA
3) Other than pitcher/fielder, most people reposition their players anyhow. If you weren't wise enough to draft any 2B, you'll just have to convert some OF into 2B. Problem solved.

Combining these two methods together might create some skill inflation. One possible solution would be to give people the option to pick (Any, Fielder, Pitcher, or specific positions). The more specific you get, the more disparity (wider downside) you get in your presented options. This emulates the fact that if you just focus on the best player for the first round you might have to choose a position you don't need so badly, but in later rounds you might prefer to specifically pick up a 2B even if it means lower odds of getting the best possible player.

Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Some tweaks and minor details aside, Rock's is the model I would support.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
In that system, players POT would be linked to their draft round.

E.G.
Round 1 - POT 13 and up
Round 2 - POT 12 - POT 13
.
.
Round 5 - POT 11 - POT 12

With a smattering of sleepers randomly (or algorithmicly inserted.
AssumedPseudonym
Joined: 10/26/2016
Posts: 1130

Deerfield Beach Rats
V.7

Broken Bat Baseball
 I generally have to back Rock’s proposal. Most of the way the draft currently works doesn’t really need a drastic overhaul, it mainly could just use a few tweaks to make it less unreasonably random and give players more control over building our teams. Rock’s proposal seems to handle the majority of the issues a lot people have taken issue with.

 Also, any scenario which would potentially encourage deliberate tanking should probably be avoided — and this is coming from someone who had the 745th-ranked team at one point.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
There are so many suggestions and comments now I often have no idea what anyone is referring to. For idea's like Rock's bold italicized one, a huge problem is that it's virtually guaranteed to not create a sitewide season's draft that is similar to the current one. The end result will be either better or worse players, which creates a huge imbalance in talent one way or the other for 15 seasons or so. That would be terrifying.

I know there will be people saying that isn't the case. Just work really hard to produce the same talent.

My response is simple--you can't. The process is far too different. It will create a vastly different set of drafted players and that's really, really bad.

The way the game creates a draft class shouldn't change. The way we deal with them should.

Updated Sunday, February 17 2019 @ 9:48:25 am PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Change is terrifying. Any change will cause the overall quality to change.

It is very feasible to keep the skill balance similar. Its simply a matter of looking at the current skill distribution, and then mirroring it. The fact that the skill distribute changes per round means that Steve can even be proactive in enforcing the same distributions. He has two levers to play with.

1) Modify overall average talent (POT) generated in any given round.

2) Modify the number and quality of sleepers in any given round.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
It will create a vastly different set of drafted players and that's really, really bad.

- Talent would no longer be stacked on just a few teams, and that is bad?

- Stacked teams that got lucky in the old system might lose their edge, and that is bad?

The whole point is to change the set of drafted players. Otherwise we minds well just stick with the current system.

Updated Sunday, February 17 2019 @ 11:12:58 am PST
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

The whole point is to change the set of drafted players. Otherwise we minds well just stick with the current system.


I disagree 100%. There is absolutely nothing wrong with the players generated. The most common points of unsatisfaction are the uneven distribution of talent and not knowing what position draftees might be due to not seeing key skills before they're drafted.

Address those concerns, but start with the same process of creating players. Generating players in some other fashion would be disastrous.

Any change will cause the overall quality to change.


Nope. That is completely false. If you keep player generation the same and change how we view and draft them, the quality of players remains exactly what it is. And that's exactly as it should be.

Updated Sunday, February 17 2019 @ 11:38:40 am PST
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
A word of apology.

When I read Admin's post, I didn't realize the points were being quoted. (I've found this thread hard to keep up with). Thought it was a little more official.

Sorry if my confusion caused more confusion.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
If you keep player generation the same and change how we view and draft them, the quality of players remains exactly what it is.


Nope. That is completely false.

Giving people full access to players will leave less scraps on the table. And it will increase the disparity in distributions.

Fixing the real issues with the draft are far more important than if Mike loses some advantage over other players because the average overall player quality has risen from 12.5 to 12.6.

BTW, I'm not suggesting we change how they are generated. Just when they are generated.

Updated Sunday, February 17 2019 @ 1:04:16 pm PST
knoxvol
Joined: 04/16/2018
Posts: 61

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Having played a bunch of sports sim games before I like the BB draft's unique feature of being spread over the course of the season. It keeps you logging on, even if your team is way ahead/behind in the league and you start losing interest.

But the usefulness of all 10 rounds is predicated on the uncertainty, that you have an outside chance of nabbing a 14 Pot. in the late rounds while even a first round pick doesn't guarantee a quality prospect.

That's why I think making the draft more predictable (all +13 Pot. in the first round, all 13 Pot. and under in the late rounds) is a mistake. If the issue is that some teams go several seasons without getting any +14 Pot. picks, can't that be solved by having generated-by-team pools coded to make sure every team is offered at minimum one +14 Pot. prospect every two/three seasons?
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
You must have incredible draft luck. I'm happy if I get a good POT 12.

If you read my idea, you will see that I specifically call out sleepers, for the very reason you mention. The idea is to better distribute players, while maintaining the chance to find sleepers in late rounds. Although honestly to me, a round nine sleeper should probably be a POT 13, not a POT 14. POT 14s are very rare in the draft overall.

Also worth noting. There is a lot of room in the POT ranges. You can just as easily pull a "Very Good" POT 12 as a "Very Good" POT 14.


Updated Sunday, February 17 2019 @ 6:06:06 pm PST
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm not against dynamic or individual pools if that's the way we want to go. If the goal is equal distribution of talent, I suspect that would move us towards the target.

I question whether that should be the goal. The current system allows for runs of luck. This actively works against parity. Margate clusters Perez, Chappa and Naranjo. They push to Legends, win a pennant, make 2 cup finals. Kal clusters Santini, Kirk, Zhou et al and enjoys a 5-6 season window as the best team in the game.

These runs of luck are not sustainable. When the core fades the team's fortunes turn and it's someone else's time to shine. (I do not share the concerns over the "draft race", and do not believe a person on 1 minute after the update is consistently fed filet mignon, while person on 60 minutes later only ever gets Dr Ballards).

Equatibly distributing talent is going to lead to (greater) parity. Parity is going to lead to divisional stagnation. If the concern is that the game feels stale (a concern I do not share), replacing a system that could, if the stars align, put Jeter, Posada, Petitte and Rivera all on one roster with one that ensures the core 4 are evenly distributed would potentially make things worse.

The test players on waivers has been such a nice addition. As a higher effort, less opaque means of acquiring talent, I feel that it's continuation (perhaps with a little lower frequency) will provide skilled managers with a viable pathway of moulding their team. Personally I would like to see draft reform put on the back burner and test players continued to see what ripples occur.
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I agree with you that I also do not feel like BB feels stagnant. I’m mostly still thrilled with the game, and do not feel like it needs overhaul or major changes. That’s why I say use caution in the amount and magnitude of changes. I don’t want to see sweeping changes to solve problems that don’t necessarily exist.

Updated Monday, February 18 2019 @ 10:56:37 am PST
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
Have to pretty much agree with @Seca on this. The game is far removed from stale for me, and if there are going to be changes to the draft system I'd rather they were minor tweaks than wholesale changes.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Maybe stale was the wrong word -- I don't think we could do better with the draft though.

It may involve more incremental change rather than overhauling it, given the responses I've gotten back.


Steve

Updated Monday, February 18 2019 @ 5:09:48 pm PST
wuggla
Joined: 05/10/2013
Posts: 1058

Colorado Springs Vultures
V.14

Broken Bat Baseball
Small tweaks to scouting could help the draft. Whatever you choosing to change please make test first? I still think no change is needed.
hurstdm
Joined: 01/18/2017
Posts: 576

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm reluctant to bump this huge thread, but here's one tiny, possible tweak that I don't think has been suggested:

There are currently 5 draft pools. Why not sub-divide these pools further? For example, divide the college draft pool by region. Maybe east colleges and west colleges? Or all the way down to specific conferences, like SEC, etc. Divide high schoolers by region? Could the Latin Academy be divided by region or country? On draft day, this would offer 10, 15, or 20 pools to pick from, instead of just 5. The draft interface would still let teams know how big each pool is on draft day.

PROS:

* The feeling of more control in searching for players.
* Teams may end up with more geographically appropriate players.
* More rumors and discussion about which pools are good/bad this year.
* Adds some complexity and another agonizing decision.
* Math may suggest that it could skew high POT talent towards the top of the draft.

CONS:

* Adds some complexity and another agonizing decision.
* Math may suggest that it could skew high POT talent towards the top of the draft.

Overall recap of my suggested tweaks:

* Include Range/Arm in scouting?
* Bump the draft time forward a few hours for time zone fairness?
* Sub-divide the draft pools?
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
None of the suggestions remove luck from the draft. There is still an incredible amount of luck. Even if we add some parity and skill into the draft, a guy who looks great on his scouting report could just as easily end up being a POT 12 as a POT 15. You still have to get lucky. Basically its really just improving the parity on people's chance to get lucky, and adding a bit more skill into the equation.
Hayseed
Joined: 02/20/2018
Posts: 289

Hood River Hawks
V.2

Broken Bat Baseball
Here's the list you don't want to be on. It could suggest bad draft strategy or a run of bad luck.

Haverhill Halflings: 149, 49 (33%), 20 (13%)
Murfreesboro Moo Cows: 100, 28 (28%), 10 (10%)
Hood River Hawks: 147, 49 (33%), 18 (12%)

Hit Rates run from 28% to 45%. I think an average team should have a Hit Rate of around 37%. That's 3-4 draft picks that work out (for somebody) every year,


hurstdm's herculian work showed how my drafting has been brutal!! And this was before I got completely skunked this season!! I drafted the only very good potential pick available to me and he now sits on the FA list.

@Seca/amalric7 -- I appreciate your thoughts, but your teams were on the "good" list. With your decent luck, I feel you don't understand how infuriating the draft has been for some. Today marks my 1 year anniversary playing BB. Were it not for being extremely active with waivers/FA, my team would be much worse and be starring at a truly awful next 365 days. I would give up.

You voice your concern of parity. Yet I think that there is already a lot of luck built into this game. The deviation of up to 20% from SI true value is just one example. I do think some luck should be in the draft still, just not nearly as much. Maybe take out 30-50%.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
People object to the draft as being too much luck and not enough skill. Well, how do we inject more skill into the the process -- more information.

Rather than having a separate prospect pool (current prospects are not real players), they are complete players. They have actual skills levels (age appropriate) and just like prospects in Hardwood, they play simulated games and have high school, college or international statistics.

This way, teams would have a lot more "real" information to judge a player on. I might not be the whole picture -- but a lot more than you have now (pretty much a age, bats/throws hand & scouting report).

How we draft/distribute these players could be a secondary improvement.



Steve
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
In that vein, would it be possible to have the draft pools exist (having high school and college careers that we can actually follow) for four seasons before the actual draft these guys would be eligible for? That would be an great addition to the game, but that seems like a big undertaking. Hardwood rosters are so much smaller than BB ones.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
It sounds like a good path to explore to me. I like the concept and will be interested to hear more as you consider it further.
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Absolutely. Looking forward to seeing where Steve goes with it.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
In that vein, would it be possible to have the draft pools exist (having high school and college careers that we can actually follow) for four seasons before the actual draft these guys would be eligible for?

Here is the difficulty with following then ahead of time. If you are only going to get a shot at drafting/picking some small subset of the players available -- say 10 a week like now -- should/do we want people to be able to view all the other options?


Steve
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Yeah. It would probably be pretty frustrating using the Hardwood recruiting process in a game where you can't pick the players that you're most interested in. It's still an exciting concept for Broken Bat.

If Broken Bat where a new game you where just testing out, I'd say just switch Hardwood's recruiting model to one where we scout instead of recruit and replace the draft with that. That'd be a big change for a mature game, though.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Yes...I considered that earlier in this thread, but people seemed to object to having to scout and draft/rank/recruit the entire population of prospects.


Steve
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
It feels like there's a missing mechanic/link that would bridge the gap and make it work, though. I could see using scouting hours like we use contacts in Hardwood. Scouting someone multiple times could fill in the scouting report and the amateur stats. That's all pretty easy to envision. After that it gets a little hazy.

What would we see when we open the scouting page? A list of names with the ??? thing you see in OotP? Are we all scouting the same group of players? I could see that devolving into an Easter egg hunt where everybody else got in ahead of you on the best guy in the draft, so you get frustrated and throw your laptop. How would these guys ultimately end up on your roster instead on somebody else's? A lot of questions I don't have ready answers for. It seems more like a "how do I get from point A to point B" problem than a completely impossible one, but still a tough concept to tie up in a neat bow.

Like I said earlier in this thread, I think getting the concept of a pro sports style draft out of the game might eliminate some of the expectations that people have for a draft in a game where that style of draft is pretty hard to pull off.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Hit Rates run from 28% to 45%. I think an average team should have a Hit Rate of around 37%. That's 3-4 draft picks that work out (for somebody) every year,

Hit rate -- this is really kind of a floating concept.

Most teams will need 3-4 new players to replace exist players each year. If you feed them all potential 13-14 guys or all potential 10-11 guys...they will take the top 3-4 per year. For the game's sake, it's best to have a decent spread -- managers can determine who gets playing time and what constitutes a "hit".

Steve
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
This solves absolutely none of the problems, and doesn't address luck at all.

If I pull 10 guys who are hitting .150 in high school in the first round, I'll still be screwed over. The issue is unrealistic high round picks, poor distribution of talent, and no control over the process.

Adding stats doesn't help with any of those issues, and is essentially just a cosmetic change. Stats will be meaningless when your high school players have a total SI of 50 or lower. They don't look like the final product.

Updated Thursday, February 21 2019 @ 4:42:39 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I don't see how feeding people POT 13-14 players in round 1 equates to 3-4 players... Its one round. They get one player.
Wine13
Joined: 12/06/2015
Posts: 28

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
reposting this since the discussion has heated up again: Gonna jump in here also even though I haven't been real active lately. One reason is because I never get any pitching in my 10 player list each week. So I'm hitter heavy and rarely(if ever) get pitching through waivers. I'm also terrible at how to use my pitching to my advantage(so that could be most of my problem):). OK here goes--

Leave the draft the way it is--you get 10 players when you select either H.S/Coll/LA/Int/All and as a 2nd part of the selection you have 1st priority, 2nd priority and rest for position selection. !st gives 5 players, 2nd 3, and rest 2. you then select 1 or 2 or all 3 of those options. Ex= I need pitching. I hit P under 1st option and rest as my options. I selected College as 1st part, so it gives me 5 College pitchers but the rest are 5 random college position players. But as others have pointed out this is where maybe a Trout or Altuve shows up

Now you have 10 players like we do now. Now the system reveals the stats for these players at their current playing level(whether it be just 1 year or more). This is where the tweak happens. At the beginning of the season you are given 100(or whatever number is decided upon) draft points. Or maybe so many points each week. Now you use those points on the player(s) you want. Each round of the draft would last from Friday(when the players are available) to say Wednesday night(when players would be assigned to winning teams). Winning teams are the ones who used the most draft points on that player. It would show you how many teams are "bidding
' on the player but not the points. You decide how many points to risk.
I think this would make the later rounds more enjoyable than they are now. You may not have anyone bidding against you the 1st couple rds but as we get deeper in the draft round-wise you may get 5 people going for the same player cuz the pool is smaller. You could even make the overall pool smaller to make it more competitive with the points right away.
You could even have players not drafted after the year roll over to next year especially H.S. players that then go to college and show more potential since we would see their stats like we can in Hardwood.
just a thought to add to the "chaos"

Stan
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

How we draft/distribute these players could be a secondary improvement.

Maybe people can read and consider the entire post.

More information means a better draft even if that is the only change. As Steve mentioned, though, he will still consider how to distribute them in a more equitable way, too. Chill.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
-1 to any stats suggestions. Its a meaningless cosmetic change that doesn't address any of the issues with the draft.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Minor league stats are meaningless, too, then. I disagree. Information has value.

I can't tell by the way Steve wrote it if he is considering divulging more of the initial skills or not. If range and arm were given, that would be significant. Heck, I'd be all for dropping the speed comment if we could see range and arm. Imagine having the scouting report with comments on hitting, power, fielding and potential, AND with initial numerical ratings in hitting, power, fielding, range and arm. You get a much truer profile (you can see true position options with that info), while still maintaining quite a bit of fuzziness (BC and PD unseen, speed hinted at by range--which is flipping it from the current way) especially without numerical overall potential disclosed (the same classifications stated, though). Add to that the stat info and there is a lot of beneficial info.

I'm not sure that you can add much info on pitchers other than the initial numerical ratings for velocity, movement, control and stamina. You could add the defensive values, but who really cares. The stats Steve mentioned could actually be more helpful than anything else.

Do that and increase the number of draftees to 15 or so and you have an enormously improved draft.

Edit--Also, maybe the first round only presents good or very good options. For rounds two and three, all are above average or better. To be clear, I'm not saying it generates those specifically for those rounds. The game simply puts in a filter for the random selection that only chooses draftees that meet those minimum criteria.


Updated Thursday, February 21 2019 @ 11:58:58 pm PST
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
How about having all of the skills on the table, but only those that stand out (for good or bad) are included on the draft report? You only hear about the guy's arm if it's well above average, or only hear about his "Good Hitting" if that's his best skill. If that same guy had 17 range, his report would include that along with the hitting. If he has three skills better than his Good Hitting, then you wouldn't hear about his hitting at all. Seems like that would be a more dynamic and realistic form of scouting.
Frankebasta
Joined: 09/15/2013
Posts: 881

Kodiak Mules
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
I kept silent till now, mainly because I've stated my point a long time ago.

I'm reading now this thread and think.... much ado about nothing :(

What we need is parity among teams.
No wasted 1st rounders, no dry spells.
It looks like we can all agree on that.

As Mike said: put a filter for Very Good, on 1st round.
For Good on 2nd to 4th.
Or somesuch. The specific number can be computed by knowing how many VG are available at the beginning of the draft and how many picks are made.

Everything else is redundant, useless, or actively a nuisance:

- position preference is redundant, if you have 10 VG players to choose from, there will be plenty of choice (yet, no sure thing you get the AllStar SS or P)

- sure, to see more skill is good for an informed judgement, but when the VG turns into a pot11... you're screwed the same

- I would HATE to have the need to browse thru HIGH SCHOOL stats.... even more work to do, time to waste, to which purpose?
More, collecting those stats would mean more processing by the server. If you can afford such, use that processin power for defensive substitutions, or anything else really.

I mean, I _DO_ care about my team. The Laredo Mules.
I don't care about my minor league team... don't really remember those nicknames or cities.
I pay a cursory glance to minor league stats.
They are not Laredo players!
They are wannabe's. School players.
And now I'd be supposed to pay attention to...the school of the school???
What next? Kindergarten?
Just gimme my 10 choices, I will choose from. No strings attached please
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Shooting off a branch from Haselrig's suggestion, how about changing the scouting report substantially, dropping all of the words and simply using ratings for every skill.

++ is 18-20
+ is 15-17
Blank (or some symbol for average) is 12-14
- is 9-11
-- is 8 or less.

Those represent their potential for each skill. Obviously players may never reach their top value, just like now.

Also, to save time for everyone, a final estimated potential SI is shown using the middle number for all skills (except for the -- which would use 6 or 7 since there are very few super low ratings of 4 or less).

I'm fairly sure Steve will hate this specific suggestion of mine, but I think it's reasonable as they are really just being rated 1 to 5 for each skill. The displayed SI projection would be +-8 from the actual value. (I would add that out current worded overall projection is basically the same as this. For example, when you see Good Potential you expect 102 SI +-8 and are normally right.) Then there is still the 20% error possibility that exists.

Similar to a previous suggestion, if this is governed by setting a minimum for each round, it could be effective by providing enough info for possible positions and distributing draftees more equitably.

(Also as has been suggested before by many, I'm in favor of topping players around 120 SI.)

Disregard any of my other posts. I think this is far simpler, appropriate and effective than anything else that spewed out of my mouth.


Updated Friday, February 22 2019 @ 4:30:05 am PST
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Why not letter grades instead of the ++, Mike? A+, A,A- etc.
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
I don't care about my minor league team... don't really remember those nicknames or cities.

Funny. I probably care more about the minor leagues than my major league team :)
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I think that's getting too specific if you use letters with pluses and minuses. You're basically giving the exact number then.

A, B, C, D and F would be fine, just as 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 would be. I used the other because that's how our settings are. I am unfamiliar with non-American grading systems. If ABCDF is standard, that probably works the best. 1 thru 5 could be confusing; is 1 or 5 best?


Updated Friday, February 22 2019 @ 4:30:50 am PST
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
So, instead of our current scouting report, we would see:

Hits: A, Draws Walks: B, Arm: A, Very Good Overall Potential?
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Actually I meant you'd get it all...

Hit-C, BC-A, PD-D, Pwr-C, Spd-C, Fld-B, Rng-B, Arm-F, Estimated SI 106

Then there would still be the info we normally get, age, bats/throws, etc.
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Seems like a bit too much transparency to me. I'd say top three skills plus top two negatives (if there are any) for five total hints/reports.
Frankebasta
Joined: 09/15/2013
Posts: 881

Kodiak Mules
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
If we go that way, then just do like in RL: scale on a 20-80 grade.
If it works for Major League scouts, it can work for us
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm sure many will see it your way, Haselrig. You say display the 5 or so greatest/least categories, so guess what... you'll be able to tell the basic letter grade by inference for the others anyway. Just display it up front and quit with the connect-the-dots game. It's like not displaying total estimated SI just to make you add it all up yourself.

Also, if you aren't getting info for fielding, range and arm, you don't really know what you have. I think 3 point ranges are just about right. It gets you in the ballpark, but not in the specific seat.

Frank, I think that's getting too specific. Letter grades are purposely more vague.

Updated Friday, February 22 2019 @ 5:22:25 am PST
Frankebasta
Joined: 09/15/2013
Posts: 881

Kodiak Mules
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Round 9
Round 7
Round 6

This is exactly why everyone is complaining!
Laredo got Three (3!) pot11 Good players in the later stages of 2039 draft.
Needless to say, I was excited to find a Good one, and a Pitcher at that!, just to realize that's a waste of time.

Frankebasta
Joined: 09/15/2013
Posts: 881

Kodiak Mules
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Mike wrote:
>>>(Also as has been suggested before by many, I'm in favor of topping players around 120 SI.<<<

absolutely!
I got lucky with two (2!) pot16 recently.
I feel ashamed.
More than anything else, I feel like i should shut up because any change will favor my team for this past cornucopia of talent.
<blush>
Frankebasta
Joined: 09/15/2013
Posts: 881

Kodiak Mules
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Haselrig:
>>>I don't care about my minor league team... don't really remember those nicknames or cities.

Funny. I probably care more about the minor leagues than my major league team :)
<<<

maybe because it was YOUR idea, and you put the work to implement it??? :)

I owe you for improving the game, in this one and other ways too, but for me it was just a meaningless choice to make
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Possibly ;) I just like small features and flavor more than most here seem to.

But the minors are also is where my team is built. The Majors is a bit of a done thing that I just move guys around in the lineup/rotation. Maybe look for a vet to plug into the DH spot.

Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Wait a second... Are we now talking about replacing Great, Very Good, Good, nothing, and Never be Good with A, B, C, D, E? How is that changing anything...? LOL
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Also, maybe the first round only presents good or very good options. For rounds two and three, all are above average or better.

And now you are most of the way back to my suggestion.

Drop off the pointless shared pools to remove the timing advantage and improve distribution, and you are basically suggesting the same thing I did (which of course you loathed when it was my suggestion, LOL).
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Wait a second... Are we now talking about replacing Great, Very Good, Good, nothing, and Never be Good with A, B, C, D, E? How is that changing anything...? LOL

It saves a bit of database space to make room for more scouted skills.
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Alright, here's my very rough proposal for a bridge mechanic to weld the Hardwood recruiting model to the current BB draft model.

All prospects would receive a total grade. A-F. Most of those would be accurate. Some would not.

At the flip, each team would receive a block of scouting hours/points. Let's call it 100. Each week starting on Friday or Saturday, you can spend those hours scouting players. A certain number of those points would reveal a prospects completely, like Mike suggests. A smaller number of points would reveal the amount I suggested (3 good + 2 bad). Then you would pick one of the players you added to your final list. The ones you do not pick would be unavailable to you the rest of the rounds. That's one area we could determine our own fate in this new model.

The second way is that you can choose to spend a large chunk (maybe as much as 100%) of your hours in any given round revealing prospects in any given pool. You'd be almost guaranteed a great prospect if you spend them all in the first round, but you'd be drafting blind the rest of the way trusting the initial scouting grades.

You'd still pick ten players total, one each Friday. You'd have a lot more control over who you'd have on your slate when the draft runs, though.

That's a rough idea. I'm not going to put much polish on it as these tend to get shot down anyway, but there it is.
Longviewess
Joined: 09/23/2018
Posts: 111

Frederick Keys
IV.5

Broken Bat Baseball
@Haselrig

That is essentially the model used by Buzzerbeater where you can spend scouting points to reveal virtually everything except the talent/potential level for players in the draft.

It could certainly work here if there is an option to reveal the potential level as well (which would need to be very expensive to do IMO). However, the sheer size of the draft pools here seems like it would be an almost overwhelming task.

Personally, I think incremental changes should be tested on the current system before giving it a complete overhaul. Keep it to one change/variable at a time to see what the impact is.

Plenty of small suggestions have been already made here that could be tested that way.

FWIW, I really liked the suggestion above to move to the 20-80 scouting scale on the scouting reports. Then again, I am the type of person who prefers minor league baseball, scouting and player development over MLB.
Samsung Lions
Joined: 07/31/2017
Posts: 22

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Personally, I think incremental changes should be tested on the current system before giving it a complete overhaul. Keep it to one change/variable at a time to see what the impact is.

Plenty of small suggestions have been already made here that could be tested that way.


+1 Scouting arm and range as with other skills would make a big improvement for relatively little investment, and wouldn't require having to learn a new draft system. (For me, this game is challenging enough !)
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
It saves a bit of database space to make room for more scouted skills.

That is not how DBs work. It doesn't save any space. DBs don't actually save all that text for each entry.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I find it hilarious that Mike is whining and crying about how "private information" would lead to rampant cheating in HW, but then proposes doing the same thing in BB, LOL!
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
What in the world are you talking about? My suggestion doesn't include any private information. Once again I need to recommend for you to actually read posts.

Here's a quick synopsis of my suggestion--
1. Include more information to the scouting report, in particular, range, arm and a slightly more specific potential SI.
2. Create a minimum potential SI for the first few rounds.
3. Increase draft options to around 15 players.

Edit--Those are in order of what I think is most important. I'm not sure 3 is necessary if 1 and 2 were implemented, and I actually wouldn't be in favor of 3 without the first two.



Updated Friday, February 22 2019 @ 1:07:30 pm PST
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
Personally, I think incremental changes should be tested on the current system before giving it a complete overhaul.

+1, possibly the most sensible point made in this entire thread. And with that in mind:-

Here's a quick synopsis of my suggestion--
1. Include more information to the scouting report, in particular, range, arm and a slightly more specific potential SI.
2. Create a minimum potential SI for the first few rounds.
3. Increase draft options to around 15 players.

Edit--Those are in order of what I think is most important. I'm not sure 3 is necessary if 1 and 2 were implemented, and I actually wouldn't be in favor of 3 without the first two.


+1 on this, absolutely. These are small, fairly straightforward (I would imagine) changes with a chance to greatly improve drafting. We could try it with the current 10 players/round pool or increase it to 15, but points 1 and 2 would go a long way IMO.

I think we could trial this for next season (if Steve's time allows) and see how it goes, and if it doesn't work (and with full understanding that you can't please everyone all the time) we could discuss more nuclear options for the future.
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
That is not how DBs work. It doesn't save any space. DBs don't actually save all that text for each entry.

Shows what I know about databases :)
wuggla
Joined: 05/10/2013
Posts: 1058

Colorado Springs Vultures
V.14

Broken Bat Baseball
Scouting added make tab on left tabs. All positions list in menu. Scroll pick for draft choice by position. This for every round of draft. You then pick a 2B it will give you 10 2B to choose from.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
After a couple of days considering other comments, here's my fine-tuned version. I promise it will be my last stab at this for at least a week. (The people rejoice!)

1. The game produces the yearly draft class like it does now with one modification--it generates the full player from the outset instead of waiting for them to be drafted.

2. More information is provided on the scouting reports. Hitting and fielding comments remain the same. Range and arm skills are published numerically (error possibility of +-1). BC, PD, Power and Speed are given a broad rating for their potential: 'Poor' if 9 or less, 'Average' or no comment for 10-14, 'Good' if 15 or more. For pitchers, all skill comments remain the same. Additionally, potential COS is given the broad rating of poor, average or good with the same criteria as above.
Since all players are completely generated before being drafted, and since more information is provided, overall potential comments are eliminated from the scouting report.

3. The game sets a minimum potential SI for players/pitchers to be drafted each round. (The exact numbers to be determined by Steve and would probably be unpublished. For it to be effective my guess it would start around 104/100, with pitchers being the lower number, and drop around 4+ every round.)

_______________________________________

I think that's basically it. As previously suggested, I'd also support topping out players around 120 SI. As was stated by others, we could bump up the number of draft choices from 10 later if we felt necessary or beneficial.

Updated Sunday, February 24 2019 @ 12:46:30 am PST
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
I preferred the earlier version (post just above), and I'm not in favour of the 120 SI cap - what's a game without superstars?
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I actually prefer the one before, too, but this one is a compromise that I think would be necessary to be accepted. It provides more info than now, but is a little more fuzzy with the info than the other proposal.

Regarding capping SI, every single owner would be elated to get a 120 guy. In my opinion, it's a pain free way of making the draft more balanced across the board. And don't think for a minute that would eliminate superstars. Look around. Most of the current ones are under 120. I don't feel like it's nearly as beneficial as the other recommendations, which is why I separated it entirely from them.

Updated Sunday, February 24 2019 @ 2:24:44 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I prefer small incremental changes rather than a huge overhaul as outlined above.

1. Get rid of shared pools. Players are generated on the fly (gets rid of time advantages, improves distribution of talent) Really no benefit to shared pools since players aren't actually created until you draft them and you don't actually compete against other teams (unless there is a race condition for a player with plays out more like a bug where a guy disappears off your list). Prospects are created on the fly, but players are created in exactly the same way they are done today.

2. Create Potential brackets per round (first round players are all Good or Very Good). 8th round pretty much just Above Average or lower.

3. Include a handful of sleepers for fun. A sleeper in the 4th round could be a Very Good, while a sleeper in the 9th round would just be a Good.

4. (optional) Use position templates so that players are *usually* an ok fit for their position.

5. (optional) Allow people to draft by position, or fielder vs pitcher.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
None of that improves information about a draftee, which means there is nothing gained in how we try to create our team. Actually, that's what 4 and 5 are getting at a little, but information instead of AI reliance is far superior, in my opinion. Put the responsibility on owners, not computers. I go by that philosophy regarding just about everything with games like this. They're meant for players, right? So let us play and take the computer out of it as much as humanly possible. (In game substitutions are the perfect examples of why we should control things and not trust the AI with anything more than necessary.)

Drafting on the fly, as you put it, is not a slight change. It's a completely radical deviation from the current system. Suggesting that is a tweak is absurd. 100% against.

I'm all for eliminating draft pools like we have now. And as I stated in my post above, I'm all for minimum SI requirements based on round IF we're provided more information that actually lets us make somewhat informed draft picks.



Updated Sunday, February 24 2019 @ 11:20:19 pm PST
Crazy Li
Joined: 01/25/2015
Posts: 879

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

Scouting added make tab on left tabs. All positions list in menu. Scroll pick for draft choice by position. This for every round of draft. You then pick a 2B it will give you 10 2B to choose from.



Unfortunately this doesn't work since like 75% of the time, players listed at 2B don't have the skills to play the position defensively. You'll end up with like 2-3 actual 2B and the rest fall short in that list... and what are the odds that one of those 2-3 guys are actual good players? Perhaps if positional assignments were more reliable, picking by position would be a great change... but as it stands, you'd only really benefit from this if you were trying to draft a pitcher.

Draft systems don't really work without draft orders. I've literally never seen a case yet that proves otherwise. You have a fairly sizable draft board of prospects, some sort of scouting (whether it be given to you or you need to earn points to manually scout them) that helps you decide an order to rank them on your board, then they auto draft based on the ordering. The most traditional way is draft order determined by last season's standings, though many argue this encourages tanking for better draft positions and why I imagine Steve never designed broken bat this way. Hockey Arena has a very unique system for draft ordering... it gives you a score and the most recent acquisitions to your team in the last # amount of days decreases your score (the better the player, the more penalty) and teams draft by score order. What this does is give you a weaker draft ranking if you've been acquiring a lot of good talent lately anyway, helping give the better players to those who presumably need it more. As far as I can tell, there's no way to really cheese the system. You can't tank for high picks since pick order isn't tied to your win/loss record. All you could do is avoid acquiring talent but then your team will kinda need the players. There's no concept of hoarding a bunch of gems to all push at the same time.

Now I'm not saying Steve should copy this model for broken bat. It probably wouldn't be feasible to implement... I'm just saying that's the only time I've seen a draft system that worked well while also not encouraging tanking. Honestly, I don't know if there's a way to have a draft in this game that's elegantly implemented. The best way to fix talent acquisition might be to do away with the draft all together and figure out a better system to replace it.

Oh and as for the DB argument earlier... I would assume that the "Excellent/Good" etc values are stored as numbers and the page converts those to text... meaning Rock would technically be correct that changing them to A,B,C, etc. would accomplish nothing. To say DBs don't work that way isn't accurate though. You CAN very well store the full string into the database if you want. It's not the most efficient way to handle it, but that doesn't mean it can't be done. I have no clue how Steve coded his DB but if I were to personally do it, I'd make the pages themselves handle the text, not the DB. That feels the most efficient to me.

Updated Monday, February 25 2019 @ 12:15:27 am PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Maybe if you are using a very old DB. Any modern DB is going to encode repetitive information. Your SQL might look like you are storing the string, but the DB doesn't store it that way internally. Yes the "correct" way to do it development wise is just to do the conversion on the page, but even if you don't the DB won't be storing that full string a thousand times in memory.

Unfortunately this doesn't work since like 75% of the time, players listed at 2B don't have the skills to play the position defensively.

This issue is 100% addressed by my position templates suggestion.


I'm all for minimum SI requirements based on round IF we're provided more information that actually lets us make somewhat informed draft picks.

This isn't really possible, because if you use a shared pool, you will still have race conditions. You just make them worse because the early birds will get all the POT 15 and 16s. In later rounds, some teams will get a slate of Good players, while other teams get a slate of Above Average because they logged in too late in the day.

The only way to solve the problem is dynamically generated players, and no, it is not a drastic change. Steve can use all the same algorithms and weightings he is using today. They would just be dispersed per round instead of one time at the start of the season.

The key difference here, is that your method would require that 7000 Very good players get generated if we wanted to guarantee everyone had some Very Good options in round 1, and those players would still be around for the rest of the draft. My method means there are 7000 prospect descriptions created, but 6300 of them are deleted. Only the handful actually drafted in the first round become generated players.

Your method requires far bigger changes to they system to become feasible and address any of the real problems with the draft.

My suggestion is also 100% compatible with the current draft pools (Asian, College, etc.)


Updated Monday, February 25 2019 @ 8:38:28 am PST
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

This isn't really possible, because if you use a shared pool, you will still have race conditions. You just make them worse because the early birds will get all the POT 15 and 16s.

I suggested getting rid of POT 15s and 16s. If you reduce the top to bottom range of players within the round, the effect of The Race is diminished. You can also do other things to help that, like creating the draft boards all at one time as the first process for the round.

The only way to solve the problem is dynamically generated players.

Suggesting there is only one way to solve ANY problem is silly.

Your method requires far bigger changes to they system to become feasible and address any of the real problems with the draft.

I don't really know what you're trying to say, so my response here might not be accurate. Big changes to the system? Not hardly. It uses the exact same generation of players with the exception of topping players at 120 if that is implemented. It absolutely improves decision making instead of relying on 90% luck. And it creates a far more equitable draft than the current one. I think those are two of the biggest complaints about the draft.


Updated Monday, February 25 2019 @ 10:21:42 am PST
Crazy Li
Joined: 01/25/2015
Posts: 879

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Yes, Rock, I understand how data compression works. I was just making a slight caveat to be nit-picky.

Positional templates could definitely help even if you don't go with the idea of selecting a specific position to draft... though it may take some of the strategy out of the game.

I mean if players almost always were playing the right position from the get-go, positional assignment in the minors becomes less valuable. You lose that part of mining through guys to find someone who's an ideal SS even though he's maybe listed as something like C... and good managers get ahead by nabbing that guy and properly training him to be a SS. I like that aspect but there is of course a problem with it. When faced with the scouting reports, you have no clue if that SS is a SS or a C. The reports will almost never tell you that. At best, it tells you he'll be a terrible SS if it has a negative fielding report... and MAYBE you can gleam range from speed... but you'll never know if he has an arm. This gets annoying where you have a fast good with good fielding that you think solved your SS problem, draft him, and find out he has 6 arm.

I feel like rather than positional templates, we just need something in the report that talks about arm strength. That alone would solve the problem with positions IMO. You already have fielding covered directly and range indirectly. If arm was also reported, you would actually be able to guess what position they would be suited to BEFORE drafting. This would be huge and still retain the idea of sometimes having to train them at a different position that better works with their skillset.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I wasn't suggesting perfect players with position templates. Rather reasonable ones. So for example no Catcher ever has an Arm less that 12 or 13 or maybe even 14. But you still probably don't want to use the guy at Catcher if he has a 14 Arm. There would still be some "busts", but you wouldn't be pulling a Catchers with 6 Arm, or SS with 6 Range.

The original idea behind the templates was really to create some minimums. So you might still draft a 1B with 18 Arm that would be better as a Catcher. To make up for the defensive minimums on position players, you add Hitting or BC minimums on less defensive positions like 1B or OFs. Could even be a net 0 gain: E.G. Catchers never have less than 12 arm, and maybe 1B never have less than 12 Hitting. Although I'm not sure it needs to be. As long as overall average SI isn't different. SS will naturally gravitate to being worse hitters. If you want a good hitting SS, you may be just as likely to get him out of the 1B pool as the SS pool, since either way you need high rolls for the additional skill sets. Or maybe SS are the only guys who can go down to 0, while most positions have minimum batting skills of 5. Lots of ways to balance.



I suggested getting rid of POT 15s and 16s

That is a FAR bigger change to player generation than I am suggesting. And your suggestion does nothing to eliminate the early bird race conditions. The people who draft early in the day will have an advantage of those who draft late. LostRaven proved that out pretty well with data.

it creates a far more equitable draft than the current one.


Not by a long shot. If I pull 10 - 15 guys, none of which have Good or Very Good potential, in the first round (yes its happened to me several time already) then it really doesn't matter how much scouting I can do or how good the scouting reports are. All those guys are garbage and the distribution is garbage.


3. The game sets a minimum potential SI for players/pitchers to be drafted each round.

How exactly do you propose to do this without creating 7000 Very Good players for the first round? You are talking about a massive change in how players are generated by skill level. This would be a HUGE deviation from the current player generation. Either that, or you just plan on giving the Very Good players to the early birds, and sticking late drafters with Above Average talent in the first round.



Updated Monday, February 25 2019 @ 4:41:33 pm PST
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
This isn't really possible, because if you use a shared pool, you will still have race conditions. You just make them worse because the early birds will get all the POT 15 and 16s. In later rounds, some teams will get a slate of Good players, while other teams get a slate of Above Average because they logged in too late in the day.

Yes, this is a big problem I'm looking into solving.

I would prefer not to get ride of dynamic range for prospects. There should be a few Manny Machados and Bryce Harpers out there.


Steve

Updated Monday, February 25 2019 @ 3:03:27 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
You wouldn't need to with the Dynamic Prospect solution. You would generate players the same as you do now. Only you would generate 10 times more prospects (within the round's SI range), and then delete 9 of the prospects after a team picked the one they wanted to keep (which is turned into a real player).
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
That is not an incremental change. (Personally I don't care, but others have claimed that's what they prefer.) It's a complete departure from the current method and would most likely produce a considerably different draft class.

I think it's a horrible idea, obviously, but I will say that if it goes to something like that, overall potential statements should be removed. The basic premise is that teams are looking at their top 10 players on the board, so they are basically equal. It then just becomes a matter of choosing a profile (often looking to position) that the owner thinks will benefit the team most. If more information isn't provided about the draft choices, though, it's still just blind luck. No thanks.

Edit--Let me restate my position on Dynamic drafting because I have realized I haven't communicated exactly what I meant. It may be possible to come up with something that could be good utilizing that method. I just don't think what has been suggested fits the bill.


Updated Monday, February 25 2019 @ 7:00:57 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I say small incremental changes. Leave the POT for now. Its used pretty heavily for waivers, and I know I use it as additional insight on the recruit. A Very Good POT 12 is usually better than an equivalent looking Good POT 12 given how players are created.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Completely changing the draft to on-the-fly is incremental, but removing overall potential rating is beyond that? Lmao.

Any draft that implements minimum overall potential per round should eliminate overall potential statements. You'll have the rest of the scouting report, round drafted and stats to consider. Owners will actually have to do some analysis themselves instead of being spoon fed. Besides, you shouldn't know you have Mike Trout the minute you draft him.



Updated Monday, February 25 2019 @ 10:55:10 pm PST
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Instead of full-scale templated players, why not fatten up the middle a bit by adding a handful of prospects to each pool that are designed instead of generated randomly? Have 12 POT prospects that are designed to play an actual position.

You'd still have as much of a chance to draft randomly generated superstars, but you'd also have some solid, dependable players mixed in that you know can play their position to be the building blocks of your team.
AssumedPseudonym
Joined: 10/26/2016
Posts: 1130

Deerfield Beach Rats
V.7

Broken Bat Baseball
 Steve, at this point you’re probably going to need to pick your favorite idea(s) and just go with them for a season or two to see how they pan out. We’re never going to get a proper consensus here.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
The templates just increase the chance of getting dependable players that know their position, no guarantee.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

Steve, at this point you’re probably going to need to pick your favorite idea(s) and just go with them for a season or two to see how they pan out. We’re never going to get a proper consensus here.

I agree that we will probably never see a strong consensus here and that doesn't really matter. How many people post regularly in the forums? 50? I don't know the number, but it's a tiny minority.

However, I hope and imagine Steve will wait until he has something he really likes before moving forward. Even then he might spend weeks or months testing it. I'm not a fan of the draft, but I'm even less of a fan of change just for the sake of change. If this gets changed and it's collectively worse, for whatever reason, it will be a big blow to BB. Imagine the draft changing for the worse on the level that the new managers did. Yikes.

I assume he'll take his time on this. Rightfully so.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
We actually had complete consensus before the necro bump.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I have no idea what you mean or what you're referring to. Whatever that is, I bet the "complete consensus" is something like three of three comments.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Nope. Was a couple hundred. Didn't get your dissenting opinion until the thread was just bumped recently.





Updated Tuesday, February 26 2019 @ 4:29:20 pm PST
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Lmao. You're claiming there were a couple hundred people who agreed to some draft idea without any dissenting opinions? That is hysterical. That should be easy to prove. Go for it.

Even if that was the case, it wasn't this thread which was created by Steve and is the official discussion. I don't think any idea here even has 50% support of responders because there are many who said they'd prefer no change.

Updated Tuesday, February 26 2019 @ 5:01:45 pm PST
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I bet the "complete consensus" is something like three of three comments.

No, a couple hundred comments obviously. Lots of the same posters obviously.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
A couple of small changes to the draft for next season.

1. Draft will be shrunk from 10 to 8 rounds.
2. 1st round draft will occur after first update -- not immediately following the creation of draft prospects.


Steve
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
Nice!
lostraven
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 1269

Corvallis Ravens
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Cool! Little increments. Let's do it!
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Personally I don't like the idea of removing round 9 and 10. The only people that really hurts are the new players who need a lot of help with their teams. And it takes away one of the trade decisions in the game. "Do I cut a player after the waiver deadline?" Now the answer is obvious, trade gone.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Reasons to reduce the draft to 8 rounds:

1. Most clubs are cutting their 9th and 10th draft picks.
2. Free agents are generally much better than 9th and 10th draft picks.
3. DB will grow slower with fewer draft picks.


Steve
Wine13
Joined: 12/06/2015
Posts: 28

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Not sure if anyone else has noticed but there is a new feature on each players page. On the dropdown for stats/graph selection there is a new feature for amateur/undrafted. Changes are afoot. yeah
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
Looking for clarification on exactly when the first round draft will occur...

What does "first update" mean?
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
Should be the first training update after the first week of Spring Training.
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
So...March 22nd?

Updated Tuesday, March 5 2019 @ 12:47:33 pm PST
Coolhand
Joined: 03/27/2017
Posts: 73

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I would think the 15th
mjreichard
Joined: 10/22/2016
Posts: 143

New Orleans Knights
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Ok...I always liked getting that 1st Rounder AB's or IP's in the first part of spring training :-(
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
That is exactly why I'm asking...still not sure what the answer is!

Hopefully the 15th, not the 22nd.
crackit
Joined: 05/15/2013
Posts: 315

Anchorage Lawless
V.8

Broken Bat Baseball
This has been a very long chain which I have not been following closely. Where have we landed?
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
From Steve:

A couple of small changes to the draft for next season.

1. Draft will be shrunk from 10 to 8 rounds.
2. 1st round draft will occur after first update -- not immediately following the creation of draft prospects.

RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

Advanced Amateur Players

What is this?
Benchwarmer
Joined: 01/06/2015
Posts: 445

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Got to say I'm not exactly sure I like the change of the timing of the first draft round. It was nice to get a guy into some spring training games immediately after he is drafted. I guess it was done so that there aren't a bunch of dead weeks in the season for drafting with the shrinking to only 8 rounds.

Could the amateur/undrafted thing mean that players can still get training even while they are not on a team? That would be an interesting change, could open up the free agent/waiver market some by having more viable players available.

Updated Friday, March 8 2019 @ 5:01:19 pm PST
garfscores
Joined: 10/13/2014
Posts: 488

Battle Creek Sting
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
Did I miss an announcement about official changes to the draft?

Don't we have the front page news for a reason?
zonablazer
Joined: 01/18/2016
Posts: 52

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Our draft picks will now lose a week of training correct, by drafting them after spring training has begun?
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
Correct. First Round draft picks used to get a week of training in the spring. With the new schedule, first round draft picks will receive the amount of training that second round picks used to receive.
Frankebasta
Joined: 09/15/2013
Posts: 881

Kodiak Mules
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
That's a bummer!
Particularly for some Draftees starting at an higher age
wickersty
Joined: 05/11/2017
Posts: 1002

Deadwood Perambulators
II.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Yeah that's a bit of a shame.
amalric7
Joined: 01/20/2016
Posts: 2235

New York Lancers
IV.2

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm not seeing any mention of drafting on the Events page either, but now that I think on it I can't remember if it said anything before?
AssumedPseudonym
Joined: 10/26/2016
Posts: 1130

Deerfield Beach Rats
V.7

Broken Bat Baseball
 Yeah, it’s never shown it on the Events page. It basically happens right at the end of the Economic Update, though.
Rebuilder
Joined: 04/27/2018
Posts: 67

Redding Raiders
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Why is everyone 16 years old now?
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Many of the future prospect will start at 16 yo and have a couple years of amateur stats before they become draftable as high school seniors etc.

Steve
Deuce
Joined: 06/07/2016
Posts: 279

New London Rippers
V.3

Broken Bat Baseball


Updated Saturday, March 23 2019 @ 2:24:04 pm PDT
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
FYI...starting some heavy simulations (offline) on the new draft prospects and bot draft handling.

Steve
zonablazer
Joined: 01/18/2016
Posts: 52

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Steve - What about all the 20 year olds with 20ish SI? They were the 16 year olds who were quickly changed, but did not gain SI.

admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Okay...so one of the features a lot of people are requesting is to draft by position. The case of draft pitcher or draft non-pitcher is pretty easy -- a player is really just one or the other.

But what about the other positions? For example, if you select Draft Catcher -- are you expecting to only get prospects with major experience ('C') or minor experience ('c') or you also would like guys with strong arms (even if they don't have position experience).

What about the other positions??


Steve
Haselrig
Joined: 04/13/2014
Posts: 2790

Novi Doubledays
IV.8

Broken Bat Baseball
You'd have to add arm and range to the scouting report, wouldn't you? Even then it wouldn't help you get a slate with ten guys who are actually able to play the position you select for.

Wouldn't it be simpler to just to stop at dividing them by pitcher or position player? To the argument that pitchers would go too fast, just like any draft, when the pitchers run out, they run out. We'd all know that was the case and we'd adjust accordingly.

It'd add another strategic decision for us to make, but I don't know that it'd be worth the work as I don't think it would be the solution people are looking for.
occham
Joined: 11/07/2011
Posts: 258

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Given how training works (being able to train people to positions), the only real distinction I can see is "throws right" and "don't care". Throws Right would tend to favor more 'infielder capable' players.

Sorting on Arm Strength would favor left side players but if they throw left, then it's just going to be frustrating for people looking for 3B/SS.

Jason2327
Joined: 09/02/2014
Posts: 717

Abilene Patriots
IV.3

Broken Bat Baseball
I would like the ability to draft by position,be it minor or major exp. I’d be one of the few people who’d not always draft pitchers as it would depend on the pipeline in my minors
lostraven
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 1269

Corvallis Ravens
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Steve,

I agree, because as is, just because a player has experience at a position doesn't make them suited for it.

I also agree with Occham about handedness (righties, please -or- don't care). I admit, I'd also love to see Range and Arm as part of the scouting report, but it's also your baby.

* Select pitcher or non-pitcher
* Select righty or no-preference
* Bonus: See Range and Arm in report
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

I don't know that it'd be worth the work as I don't think it would be the solution people are looking for.



I agree with this 100%.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
This is why I proposed position templates. If you use position templates for player creation, then the problem takes care of itself.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball

* Bonus: See Range and Arm in report


This makes a lot of sense. If Steve thinks that reveals too much, I think we should see range instead of speed. We would then have true information about what position a guy might play.

That would require a programming change to create the full player before being drafted, but I think that's a direction the game should go anyway. Then overall potential declarations would be more accurate, too.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
So this would also be a requirement for the search:

C, 2B, 3B, SS: throws R only
1B: throws L or should this be either?
OF: either


Steve
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm open to draft by position, but have some reservations.

Determining the best position for a player is one of the core skills in the game. If we start putting players in buckets (especially if there are templates for positions), are we not eliminating an important part of strategy?

when the pitchers run out, they run out

I don't believe the "early bird bonus" effect is as significant as some others. But I draft from the large HS pool. The bonus is more significant in the smaller pools (Intl). With draft by position the pool is fragmented into many smaller pieces. Does this not heighten the EBB?

I recognize it may add some strategy. You could zig while others zag (ha suckers! 1st round 1B!). Ultimately you only need so many 1B.

(I recognize individual pools have been suggested and would alleviate this, but from what I've read this isn't the direction we're headed).
lostraven
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 1269

Corvallis Ravens
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I don't think "draft by position" works well either.

Steve asked:

C, 2B, 3B, SS: throws R only
1B: throws L or should this be either?
OF: either



I would argue, rather, that if Steve is willing to let us see at least Range, if not also Arm (instead of Speed, as Mike points out)—and here's the important part—I think we can get away with choosing between a pitcher or a bat. Steve wouldn't have to worry about this "if C, 2B, 3B, SS, show righties; if OF..." etc. If we could see Range and Arm, it largely becomes:

Bat: throws L or R
Pitcher: throws L or R

With the bat, if you're looking for a lefty thrower, you know you're going to look for a 1B or OF, and with the Range and Arm visible, you go from there. If you're looking for a righty thrower, you know you're going for an non-1B infielder, and again, Range and Arm can guide your decision. And pitcher, that's pretty self explanatory; Range and Arm aren't necessary, though most of us prefer the lower values because it typically more points in the main pitching categories.

This should, in theory, benefit us, the players, and—though Steve can only say programatically how difficult it would be—also in theory he's not having to do too much extensive work by having four different pools of players (P, OF, 1B, the rest). But, as has been said, would that suit a majority?


Updated Sunday, March 31 2019 @ 1:20:59 pm PDT
cloudzell91
Joined: 12/03/2013
Posts: 11

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
my suggestion is just, let us draft a player even if our roster is full/max 50 and just let us decide afterward who to drop if we like the player we drafted.

thanks
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
Agree with LostRaven...best way to “draft by position” is just to add scouting reports for (or just show) range and arm.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
With position templates, you would still end up re-positioning a lot of guys. You would just be more likely to get a guy who could play the position.

Also, if you used position templates a lot of people would still want to draft a 1B in the first round. Because that is going to be your best chances to pick up a really good hitter. A SS will give you the best defensive coverage, but has the lowest odds of being a good hitter (because the templates only provide them with defensive bonuses). 1B/OF are going to have offensive bonuses in their position templates.

Notional Examples:

1B minimums
Hitting: 8
BC: 5
PD: 5
Power: 10

SS minimums
Fielding:8
Range:12
Arm:8


You could get lucky with either one, but I'm not drafting a SS if I need a bat.
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
I see.

Obviously could haggle over the numbers. But if the intent is to allow draft by position, I think SS shoppers are going to be miffed with their 8 arm 12 range acquisitions.

I don't think you'd see early birds going for 1B. Upper league SS are not 12 pots with their skills skewed to defence. They are 14-15 pots. If you SS pool is setting a floor on defensive skills you pick the best offensive player on your board. This gives you the best chance at a high pot player. If the player low rolls one of the defensive skills, he's perfectly acceptable at another position (range 3B, arm 2B, ..).

Compare that to 1B. 12 pots make fine 1B b/c less skill is needed defensively. If your great / prolific LHT from the 1B pool high rolls 14 pot ... grats on the 19 arm. It doesn't mean nearly as much, as you can't leverage the SI as effectively.

Getting a good SS is in no way a disincentive from returning to the pool the next season. I'd rather have a SS playing 3B than a 3B. Same at 2B. 1B .... Got a good 1B? Do you really want to make your next 1st round pick from a pool where 70% of your board could be LHT low range guys? The pool becomes dead.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Well I think there should still be busts. Sure folks won't be happy, but sometimes you will draft a bust SS with 12 Range. At least it won't be some ridiculous 400 lb kid with 6 Range who never could have played at the College level.

Early birds might still go after the SS, but a clever drafter who comes in 2 hours after the new draft started (and all the good SS are gone) will likely go for another position. Less likely to be cleaned out. Nothing saying you can't get a 1B prospect with 16 Fielding, 18 Range, and 16 Arm after all. Just read the reports ;)
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Ugh...two serious bugs so far that I'm cleaning up. Hope this is worth it in the end.

Steve
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
I will try to produce some screen shots from my testing.

Steve
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Using that SS template, you'd normally get one guy out of ten that would have the defensive tools to play short. I'm not a fan of the idea at all.

In my opinion it makes much more sense to provide range and arm data, even if it is just categorized like fielding is instead of giving the specific number. We'd have a much better idea of positions then.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
That is the whole point. There should be busts. 9/10 is a pretty good rate.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Maybe you misunderstood what I said. If you got a slate of 10 of those "shortstops," only one would even truly be a shortstop. That's not 9 out of 10. That's 1 out of 10. Which isn't helpful at all.
ChillFunkEz3000
Joined: 03/13/2017
Posts: 170

High Point Shaolin Stars
II.2

Broken Bat Baseball
How about having the option to select based on our needs, but instead of by position by capacity, with 4 simple options to select from, such as:
Fielding
Hitting
Pitcher
Random

Selecting Fielding would give you more players that are strong in that area, Outstanding - Amazing, etc).

Selecting Hitting would give you more players that are strong in that area, Great - Very Good - Prolific, etc.

Selecting Pitching would give you more pitchers than position players.

Selecting Random would work pretty much as is now.

All that depending of the "luck" of the board you get.

The idea wouldn’t be to only have a board with Fielders or Pitchers or Hitters depending on what you choose. Ideally it would work as an increase percentage of your board having more of what you are looking for, giving us more capacity to select based on what we think the team needs in the future.

PS: How about having different draft boards for different leagues/divisions? Feasible?
lostraven
Joined: 07/02/2016
Posts: 1269

Corvallis Ravens
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
@Mike:

In my opinion it makes much more sense to provide range and arm data, even if it is just categorized like fielding is instead of giving the specific number.



Oh wow! It never occurred to me to just have Range and Arm scouting comments. That would be fine too!
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
If you got a slate of 10 of those "shortstops," only one would even truly be a shortstop. That's not 9 out of 10. That's 1 out of 10.

Which is perfect. You only need one in a slate of 10. But regardless, you are very spoiled if you think only 1 in 10 would be a SS. The average skills set would be 14/16/14. That's a passable SS to me. So probably half the guys would be passable. Guess that just means you wouldn't be drafting SS, to my point that each person would draft what they needed.

BTW, nothing stopping us from combining position templates and more detailed scouting reports.







Updated Monday, April 1 2019 @ 6:58:30 pm PDT
Benchwarmer
Joined: 01/06/2015
Posts: 445

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I like Chill's idea, not too complex while giving us more options. Maybe add options like "arm" or "range" for those looking for catchers or OFs. To my brain, seems like it shouldn't be too hard to implement, but I am no programmer.
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm not sure why you wouldn't choose hitting every time (aside from wanting a pitcher).

Even if you wanted a defensive player, better to get a board filled with very good and great hitters, and pick the guy with the most speed and fielding scouting.

Player skills are not weighted evenly (this is good - allows 12 pots to be better than 14 pots). But it means a system that selects by player skill is always going to be skewed.

Separate thought. Since Steve is testing an debugging, I'm wondering if we've moved past the suggestion stage. There may already be a somewhat firm path in place.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I agree 100%, Seca. It doesn't take long to realize hitting is far and away the most important skill. Get a collection of the best hitters and pick one.
ChillFunkEz3000
Joined: 03/13/2017
Posts: 170

High Point Shaolin Stars
II.2

Broken Bat Baseball
The idea isn't to have a board full of very good or great hitters. Using your example, it's more of an increase odds/percentage of finding a decent hitter in your board, now if it's in round 1 the odds/percentage would be higher than in round 2, and so on in each round.

But all that depends on what others would pick, if everyone would pick hitting then (i.e.)in round 3 there would be slim pickings at hitting.

Obviously this idea could be further improved, it's just a rough draft. But in this game I don't see picking by position as something that is very meaningful, since we can train the position with some ease, with the exception of Asian draftees. But I could be wrong.

I still think draft boards for individual leagues would go along way.

Dan6176
Joined: 04/30/2016
Posts: 254

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I think adding arm and range to the scouting report would be a good idea. Knowing a prospect can be an infielder because he has good or excellent arm and range comments would help a lot. Also, to have an option to have all pitchers, all hitters, or both when drafting would be a good thing also. For instance, after selecting what pool (high school, college etc) have another option to pick from a pitchers pool, non-pitchers pool, and an any players pool.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
I'm not sure why you wouldn't choose hitting every time... Player skills are not weighted evenly.

And templates could be developed to reflect that. I just showed some notional zero-sum templates. But if Hitting is more valuable than defense, its easy enough to provide less bonus to 1B than SS.

You do realize this is a complete reversal from "I would just draft a SS every time" ;) Shows there is a good balance in there if the correct numbers are used.

Updated Tuesday, April 2 2019 @ 8:46:30 am PDT
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
it's more of an increase odds/percentage of finding a decent hitter in your board

Heehee. Agreed, my example was on the rosy side. But I think we're mostly saying the same thing here.

But all that depends on what others would pick, if everyone would pick hitting then (i.e.)in round 3 there would be slim pickings at hitting.

This is what happens now. Its why your late round boards are half "never be a decent hitter".

I still think draft boards for individual leagues would go along way.

I see several cans of worms this would open. It would mean major retooling.

You do realize this is a complete reversal from "I would just draft a SS every time" ;) Shows there is a good balance in there if the correct numbers are used.

Haha! Kinda looks like that, but I disagree. If you draft by skill, you should choose the most valuable skill. If by template, you should choose the most valuable template.

The positions aren't equal. If the templates are equal then they probably aren't doing a good job of drafting by position.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
The idea with the templates is that they should be of equal value (not absolute zero-sum). If the community values hitting more than defense, then the hitting oriented templates (1B/OF) should have less total bonus/minimum SI than the defense oriented templates.

The idea is to guarantee certain minimums, not create skill inflation. At the same time, the minimums shouldn't be "Mike" high-expectation super stars, but rather "Rock" waiver dregs types, with busts. Not every kid who plays SS in college should be a superstar SS in the majors, but there should at least be some minimal expectations. Some will still get converted to 2B or 3B or even 1B if they don't meet your requirements. But if you spend all your time drafting for SS, you are sacrificing some potential bats. A healthy trade-off decision.

It would take a bit of trial and error, but Steve could easily put in a good initial set of templates and then monitor draft choices. He can then buff/debuff templates to try and equalize out how much people are drafting. Of course at the end of the day some of that will happen naturally. If no one is drafting 1B, that's the first position I am going after.

Maybe most people just convert failed SS acquisitions into 2B, leaving 2B ripe for picking, a savvy drafter will look for holes in the draft as much as holes in their team.

Updated Tuesday, April 2 2019 @ 2:00:49 pm PDT
ChillFunkEz3000
Joined: 03/13/2017
Posts: 170

High Point Shaolin Stars
II.2

Broken Bat Baseball
@Seca
I still think draft boards for individual leagues would go along way.

I see several cans of worms this would open. It would mean major retooling.


Why would having draft boards for individual leagues open several cans of worms? The way I see it those draft boards could work in the same way as they do right now. But instead of having one stand alone huge draft board with likely thousands of players, we would have one draft board for each league, with each of those draft boards being generated in a similar way, with (i.e.)similar players in potential for each of the different leagues. The boards would be identical in each league.

That way IMO, we would reduce the chance of having teams getting the shaft in the draft so often, especially in the early rounds.

Updated Wednesday, April 3 2019 @ 10:49:22 am PDT
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
There are lots of worms with this.

For one, some leagues have mostly bots. So some players would be tempted to throw games in order to relegate into a bot league to get better recruits.

Additionally, there is still the question of order. Who gets to pick first. In a small pool like that the first or second picks are going to be exponentially more valuable than the 11th or 12th pick. Again, likely to motivate some sort of record control / tanking.

Plus many more issues I'm sure.
ChillFunkEz3000
Joined: 03/13/2017
Posts: 170

High Point Shaolin Stars
II.2

Broken Bat Baseball
@Rock777

For one, some leagues have mostly bots. So some players would be tempted to throw games in order to relegate into a bot league to get better recruits.

Easy fix, make BOT teams draft the best players on their board! I mean, don't BOT teams get HUMAN owners eventually?

Additionally, there is still the question of order. Who gets to pick first. In a small pool like that the first or second picks are going to be exponentially more valuable than the 11th or 12th pick. Again, likely to motivate some sort of record control / tanking.

I don't understand that comment about the order! IMO the draft should continue the same way, only change would be instead of one huge draft board for all the leagues, we could have one draft board for each league. I'm not suggesting snake drafts. It would remain the same, but, with similar draft boards across the leagues it would be much more fair. IMO.

Plus many more issues I'm sure.

I still don't get any of the issues, unless it's a code/server space.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Making the pools smaller (per league) just exacerbates the race issue. The pool will drain of talent quicker.

The problem is that the bots are not good at drafting. Would be fine if their AI was good, but that is difficult to code. Currently the bot drafting AI is not up to snuff with real players.
ChillFunkEz3000
Joined: 03/13/2017
Posts: 170

High Point Shaolin Stars
II.2

Broken Bat Baseball
Making the pools smaller (per league) just exacerbates the race issue. The pool will drain of talent quicker.

It's the opposite! Sorry, but that's just not adding up, how can the pool drain of talent quicker when all the pools (for all the leagues/each league individually) are similar?

I just can't agree with that. Makes no sense in my view.

The problem is that the bots are not good at drafting. Would be fine if their AI was good, but that is difficult to code. Currently the bot drafting AI is not up to snuff with real players.

Yea, I can see that as an issue. But AI should never do anything as good as human. So as long as everyone agrees it's a good AI...
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
A smaller pool will have less quality players to start with.


Yea, I can see that as an issue. But AI should never do anything as good as human. So as long as everyone agrees it's a good AI...

Which motivates tanking so you can clean up in the draft.

If you aren't doing a serpentine draft, what is the point of league pools?

Updated Wednesday, April 3 2019 @ 6:06:23 pm PDT
ChillFunkEz3000
Joined: 03/13/2017
Posts: 170

High Point Shaolin Stars
II.2

Broken Bat Baseball
@Rock777

A smaller pool will have less quality players to start with.


Please explain. Because that makes no sense to me. Did you read my suggestion?

Which motivates tanking so you can clean up in the draft.

How?
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
PS: How about having different draft boards for different leagues/divisions? Feasible?

This is the only thing I saw in your suggestion. If you have more thoughts about why you would do that, I'd be happy to read it.

The smaller pool will drain faster. Especially if you are in a human heavy league (compared to a bot heavy league). I really don't see a point in showing the math since it will just create confusion at best, and a flame war at worst. If you don't believe me, that is fine.

People will be motivated to tank because if they are in a low level league with a bunch of bots they can get Very Good draft picks 1-5. While if they are in a high level league with all human opponents, they will be lucky to get a good #1 pick.
ChillFunkEz3000
Joined: 03/13/2017
Posts: 170

High Point Shaolin Stars
II.2

Broken Bat Baseball
Here’s the system that I’m proposing. The percentages shown are just an example, I’m sure Steve would have a much better feel to come up with them.

LL = 1 = 12 teams = 96 drafted players (draft pool of 125) +30%
II = 2 = 24 teams = 192 drafted players (draft pool of 250) +30%
III = 4 = 48 teams = 384 drafted players (draft pool of 500) +30%
IV = 8 = 96 teams = 768 drafted players (draft pool of 1000) +30%
V = 16 = 192 teams = 1536 drafted players (draft pool of 2000) +30%
VI = 32 = 384 teams = 3072 drafted players (draft pool of 4000) +30%

12 teams per league
8 picks per team
6048 total players drafted (7875 total players) +30%

Potential breakdown:
16 POT = 3% of players in the draft
15 POT = 5% of players in the draft
14 POT = 10% of players in the draft
13 POT = 17% of players in the draft
12 POT = 22% of players in the draft
11 POT = 20% of players in the draft
10 POT = 20% of players in the draft
9 POT = 3% of players in the draft


Players in draft per potential: VI
16 POT = 120 players in the draft divided by the 32 league VI leagues = 3.7 players per league
15 POT = 200 players in the draft divided by the 32 league VI leagues = 6.2 players per league
14 POT = 400 players in the draft divided by the 32 league VI leagues = 12.5 players per league
13 POT = 680 players in the draft divided by the 32 league VI leagues = 21.2 players per league
12 POT = 880 players in the draft divided by the 32 league VI leagues = 27.5 players per league
11 POT = 800 players in the draft divided by the 32 league VI leagues = 25 players per league
10 POT = 800 players in the draft divided by the 32 league VI leagues = 25 players per league
9 = 120 players in the draft divided by the 32 league VI leagues = 3.7 players per league


Players in draft per potential: V
16 POT = 60 players in the draft divided by the 16 league V leagues = 3.7 players per league
15 POT = 100 players in the draft divided by the 16 league V leagues = 6.2 players per league
14 POT = 200 players in the draft divided by the 16 league V leagues = 12.5 players per league
13 POT = 340 players in the draft divided by the 16 league V leagues = 21.2 players per league
12 POT = 440 players in the draft divided by the 16 league V leagues = 27.5 players per league
11 POT = 400 players in the draft divided by the 16 league V leagues = 25 players per league
10 POT = 400 players in the draft divided by the 16 league V leagues = 25 players per league
9 = 60 players in the draft divided by the 16 league V leagues = 3.7 players per league


Players in draft per potential: IV
16 POT = 30 players in the draft divided by the 8 league IV leagues = 3.7 players per league
15 POT = 50 players in the draft divided by the 8 league IV leagues = 6.2 players per league
14 POT = 100 players in the draft divided by the 8 league IV leagues = 12.5 players per league
13 POT = 170 players in the draft divided by the 8 league IV leagues = 21.2 players per league
12 POT = 220 players in the draft divided by the 8 league IV leagues = 27.5 players per league
11 POT = 200 players in the draft divided by the 8 league IV leagues = 25 players per league
10 POT = 200 players in the draft divided by the 8 league IV leagues = 25 players per league
9 = 30 players in the draft divided by the 8 league IV leagues = 3.7 players per league


Players in draft per potential: III
16 POT = 15 players in the draft divided by the 4 league III leagues = 3.7 players per league
15 POT = 25 players in the draft divided by the 4 league III leagues = 6.2 players per league
14 POT = 50 players in the draft divided by the 4 league III leagues = 12.5 players per league
13 POT = 85 players in the draft divided by the 4 league III leagues = 21.2 players per league
12 POT = 110 players in the draft divided by the 4 league III leagues = 27.5 players per league
11 POT = 100 players in the draft divided by the 4 league III leagues = 25 players per league
10 POT = 100 players in the draft divided by the 4 league III leagues = 25 players per league
9 = 15 players in the draft divided by the 4 league III leagues = 3.7 players per league


Players in draft per potential: II

16 POT = 7.5 players in the draft divided by the 2 league II leagues = 3.7 players per league
15 POT = 12.5 players in the draft divided by the 2 league II leagues = 6.2 players per league
14 POT = 25 players in the draft divided by the 2 league II leagues = 12.5 players per league
13 POT = 42.5 players in the draft divided by the 2 league II leagues = 21.2 players per league
12 POT = 55 players in the draft divided by the 2 league II leagues = 27.5 players per league
11 POT = 50 players in the draft divided by the 2 league II leagues = 25 players per league
10 POT = 50 players in the draft divided by the 2 league II leagues = 25 players per league
9 = 7.5 players in the draft divided by the 2 league II leagues = 3.7 players per league


Players in draft per potential: LL
16 POT = 3.7 players in the draft
15 POT = 6.2 players in the draft
14 POT = 12.5 players in the draft
13 POT = 21.2 players in the draft
12 POT = 27.5 players in the draft
11 POT = 25 players in the draft
10 POT = 25 players in the draft
9 = 3.7 players in the draft


So with a system like this, all leagues would have the same draft board strength. Opposite of what happens with the current system where with a single draft board there’s no way to guarantee an equilibrium. With this system there would be balance across all draft boards in each of the leagues, sure some teams will still have a bit more luck and draft higher POT players, but we know it’s a fair deal each season. As it is currently, we cannot say or guarantee that, IMO.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
That would be serious skill inflation. I'm one of the biggest proponents of having "real" drafts, but, unfortunately, I don't think there's a way to implement anything remotely similar to one and keep everyone happy.

As the years have rolled along, including this fascinating thread, I've come to realize I'm pretty much against anything that creates the draft class and distributes them in a way that is significantly different than now. I think it's near impossible for a massive departure from the current method to produce like results, and I think that's paramount to any change.

I still think there are only two things that can be done. First, provide more info regarding draftees so we have a truer picture of who and what they are. And, second, create a more balanced, equitable list of draft choices sitewide; we all should get similar quality boards.
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
Some screen shots...

Adding a few more draft options (number of prospect would be larger in the real game):

30c7rdc.jpg




Updated Thursday, April 4 2019 @ 10:32:49 pm PDT
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
When you select a option, then you have these kind of options will more information able the prospect:

16koq39.jpg


Updated Thursday, April 4 2019 @ 10:15:54 pm PDT
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
If you desire, you can click to the prospect page and see more amateur/overseas statistics:

1115c3d.jpg
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Omg. That looks awesome!!!!

The obvious question is regarding position if selected. Is it using their primary current position or something else?
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
As I'm testing right now, it just looks for somebody with major or minor position experience at that position. But I don't expect that to stay that way. I posted some questions about that earlier, but now that I have most of the mechanics done, I'm going to start tuning things a bit more.

Steve
admin
Joined: 01/27/2010
Posts: 4981

Administrator
Broken Bat Baseball
ChillFunkEz3000 - do you think the potential spread of prospects is not a good distribution currently?

I think player generation is reasonably -- I think this is more about improving the draft mechanism for them -- one that allows for a bit more control, strategy and team planning/shaping (by providing more information and options).


Steve

Updated Friday, April 5 2019 @ 12:48:41 am PDT
RDailey1948
Joined: 12/29/2016
Posts: 147

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
Echo Mike - WOW!!!!

Clarification Question for Post 64401:

User selects 1 category and gets

A) All postions across College for example
or
B) All pools across Pitchers?


Thanks for the peek!

Updated Friday, April 5 2019 @ 4:47:17 am PDT


Updated Friday, April 5 2019 @ 4:48:23 am PDT
Don't know how I got that emoji - too early!


Updated Friday, April 5 2019 @ 4:49:27 am PDT
wuggla
Joined: 05/10/2013
Posts: 1058

Colorado Springs Vultures
V.14

Broken Bat Baseball
Looks great Steve!!! Get much better scouting report for all picks. When we see stats on player page. That works. Plus my fave is we can pick a pitchers in 1st round choice. Can't wait to try new features!!!
ChillFunkEz3000
Joined: 03/13/2017
Posts: 170

High Point Shaolin Stars
II.2

Broken Bat Baseball
@admin

Great work on the new draft mechanism, it looks great.

"...do you think the potential spread of prospects is not a good distribution currently?
"


I'm not disputing that the potential spread of prospect players isn't a good distribution. I mentioned in my post that those percentages were for example sake alone.
What I'm saying is that even with a great player distribution across the draft board, some leagues will get better players than others because of the single draft board system, I mean it's impossible to control that do to it being one single board where every team from every league dips. Prospect players aren't being distributed fairly because of that IMO. If we were to use that same prospect distribution (obviously using percentages to reduce the # of players like I did in my previous example post) that is now in use but on a individual draft board for each league, we would make sure that every team in every league would have a fair shot at all the players.
Jason2327
Joined: 09/02/2014
Posts: 717

Abilene Patriots
IV.3

Broken Bat Baseball
That looks really awesome Steve 👍👍
Bridger
Joined: 08/04/2016
Posts: 264

Muncie Flyers
III.4

Broken Bat Baseball
I think distributing the pool across the entire player base is more balanced. This equalizes the effect of the bots across the player base instead of punishing the players in better leagues.

As a DVI player currently, it would be great for me to have individual league pools...but I don't plan on being here forever.

@Steve: Change looks great to me! You can still get hit by an unlucky pool, but at least you won't miss the strong prospects in your pool if they are there. This also creates dynamic choices when there are multiple good prospects in the pool as we will have enough information to project eventual builds.

I was nervous about changes to the draft, but this keeps the spirit of the traditional Broken Bat draft. Love it!!!

Updated Friday, April 5 2019 @ 2:55:54 pm PDT


Updated Friday, April 5 2019 @ 2:56:04 pm PDT
Dan6176
Joined: 04/30/2016
Posts: 254

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
This looks very awesome.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
So this is first come first serve starting at 2:00 AM PT? The first guys to log in get all the good players?
Dan6176
Joined: 04/30/2016
Posts: 254

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
This is the breakdown of all my draft picks by potential since the '27 season. I usually pick several hours after 2:00 AM PST Fridays, and sometimes up to a few days after. Except for my first 8 picks of '27, I pick the best available players based on scouting report comments.

POT... # of picks
15... 1
14... 5
13... 32
12... 20
11... 29
10... 18
9.... 5

I think I have done average in my picks. I do not think, as a whole, I have done worse than people who pick at 2:00 AM.

I appreciate that Steve is giving us more options and information in future drafts. I don't see a problem in keeping the the 10 player draft page based on which draft pool is selected.


I think a better way to build a Major League roster is a bigger Minor League roster. This way, I could keep more border line players that I may release right away based on a less than stellar build. I could keep them in the minors to see how they grow and perform. To me a draft based on probability is the best way to go based on the size of this league.
JJNZ
Joined: 12/09/2014
Posts: 1580

Yakima Monster
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
@ Steve - incredible work, there's always going to be cynics but I don't see any way of criticising what you've done there, it's exactly what BB is all about, I wonder about hiding the potential again as it used to be so that there is an element of guesswork but I can see the argument to leave it as it ls.

The real world examples I'd provide would be Mark Buerhle and Kevin Pillar, both drafted in the 30th something round and have had solid major league careers. If we consider they're equivalent to a pot 13 then they'll get snapped up a lot sooner. Not necessarily a bad thing, but as Freddy would point out, I do enjoy dumpster diving!
peacockpenguin
Joined: 11/18/2014
Posts: 102

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I really don't think drafting earlier in the day has that much of an effect as people think. At least not enough to warrant a change.

Since 2026
1-16 Pot
4-15 Pot
12-14 Pot
15-13 Pot
29-12 Pot

This comes out to 61 players I kept or would consider keeping over 15 years of drafting. Also considering I was basically inactive for two seasons in the middle of that this comes out to over an average of 4 players a year that are kept. I usually draft around noon pacific time.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Its been proven without a doubt. Drafting early makes a difference.
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
Indeed!

If you play long enough you will discover your first round picks are usually better than your 7th round picks! (Not for me this season, but usually).
jpnwrt
Joined: 06/29/2018
Posts: 47

Logan Pioneers
V.6

Broken Bat Baseball
I am still a freshman in BB, but I think what Rock777 and Seca are saying will become even more important in the new draft system, because it'll be easier to pick players with desired sets of crucial attributes.
But it'll be a real challenge to find the solution fair to everyone.
If there are subpools, managers in the bot leagues like myself will have the advantage.
If there's one pool for everyone, managers who most of the time can login at 2 am will have the advantage.
If there's one pool and no fixed time but a window when the draft is available, ppl who can't keep logging in every 15 minutes will be at a disadvantage.
How about a mix? For instance: 1/2 of the pool, by random, goes into the generally available pool at 2 am, while the other half of the draft becomes gradually available in league limited subpools during the next 24 hours. The specific numbers are of course just to present the model I'm talking about.
Unfortunately even if the model would be good for us, managers, the question remains if this wouldn't introduce too many programming problems for Steve (nice work with the project of the new draft screens!)

E: Of course I'm not claiming this would be a perfect solution! I just think it would reduce a little bit the disadvantage of logging in late.


Updated Friday, May 10 2019 @ 5:39:16 am PDT

E: Just 1 more question. If I go back long enough reading this thread, will I find anything about advantages and disadvantages of a dynamic draft (the way it is now), versus a static one? By "static", I mean the draft not on the first-come-first-serve basis, but based on the draft order lists.
I don't want to spam the thread with something that had already been discussed, so I've scrolled back through the thread a few months, but it seems to me it might be significantly longer than that :)


Updated Friday, May 10 2019 @ 7:49:03 am PDT
Brewnoe
Joined: 03/25/2014
Posts: 814

Fall River Naughty Dawgs
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
Want a static? ... rub a balloon on that hat!!

(and other fun with red rider bb guns)
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
and Seca are saying

Hehe. I was being a little facetious with my post. :) Obviously on the macro scale drafting in the 1st round will (usually) yield a better player than the 8th round.

What's more contentious is the smaller scale. Is it a tangible effect in a given round? I personally feel it's not a big deal (tho I wouldn't recommend the Asian pool if you arrive 3 hours late for round 1).

I posted this in another thread. This was the average potential for the first 90 players chosen in 2040 broken into 10 player buckets.

1-10: 13.3
11-20: 13.4
21-30: 12.4
31-40: 13.1
41-50: 13.1
51-60: 12.7
61-70: 13.0
71-80: 13.4
81-90: 12.3

Just one season, but this year anyway the person who drafted 1st and the person that drafted 80th both came away with the same average potential.

As for static, the main problem is the scope. There are 1000s of players in the draft pool that you would need to scout and form into a list. Your list would need to be massive to have enough redundancy to actually pick a player you want. (Secondary concern is determining the draft order). And yes, league or individual pools gets around this problem, but this also has issues both technical and philosophical.
jpnwrt
Joined: 06/29/2018
Posts: 47

Logan Pioneers
V.6

Broken Bat Baseball
Thanks, Seca. After the post above yours, I was afraid my hair will need serious makeover once I get the replies from the big guns, but you at least were kind ;-)

Yes, I was obviously thinking of smaller pools, for the static model. And I also think determining the order would be a minor problem in that case. Number one remains extra programming work (and realistically there would be no chance for that before next season begins).
So I will not even touch the philosophy, in order not to distract you guys from the issues still realistically possible. At least until we'll have the chance to see the new system at work. Thanks again for the reply.

Updated Friday, May 10 2019 @ 9:56:25 am PDT
peacockpenguin
Joined: 11/18/2014
Posts: 102

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
I believe my point was completely missed. Obviously there's going to be a drop-off in talent between round 1 and round 8. I don't see much evidence for a similar drop-off between round 1 pick 100 vs round 1 pick 300.


What's more contentious is the smaller scale. Is it a tangible effect in a given round? I personally feel it's not a big deal (tho I wouldn't recommend the Asian pool if you arrive 3 hours late for round 1)



That's the point I was trying to make

Updated Friday, May 10 2019 @ 11:10:35 am PDT
Brewnoe
Joined: 03/25/2014
Posts: 814

Fall River Naughty Dawgs
III.3

Broken Bat Baseball
I want chicken and orange juice, that's what's on my rider
And my occasional potato by Ore-Ida
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
@ jpnwrt
Number one remains extra programming work (and realistically there would be no chance for that before next season begins).

Ya. AFAIK Admin has said smaller pools aren't going to happen. So we could debate the merits all we want, but its not going to get us anywhere.

@ peacockpenguin
I believe my point was completely missed. Obviously there's going to be a drop-off in talent between round 1 and round 8. I don't see much evidence for a similar drop-off between round 1 pick 100 vs round 1 pick 300.

Certainly didn't overlook your post, and I agree with your point of view. From what I've seen, player quality isn't granular enough to vanish mid round.

I do think the smaller pools are more sensitive to the effect. If you are not early it is prudent to stay away from them.
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
There is going to be a larger drop off from 100 to 300 than from 0 to 100. Its just the way math works.
MukilteoMike
Joined: 08/09/2014
Posts: 3294

Inactive

Broken Bat Baseball
No, that's not true. Actual data and values would be needed to claim that. Even then you could only declare that if a computer performed the entire draft. With people, who make choices, being involved you have no idea where the biggest drop-offs will be. People "mess up" randomness. To a certain degree there's the matter of skill involved in drafting. I'd rather have 100 monkeys draft before me than 25 owners.
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
It will be interesting to see what the draft change does.

With the "fog of war" being removed from the draft list and added to player potential, I suspect we will see a more rapid decline in potential. (I'm not likely to chose a 9 pot in the first round).

This suggests that early bird might be a thing. It will be easier to nab that 15 pot at pick #22. But is he really a 15 pot? May also mean bad good players go earlier. Under the old system many experienced managers would choose "great hitting good potential" (and cross their fingers) over "no hitting very good potential". Those high potential "trap" players are more likely to go in the early rounds now, instead of showing up at the end of the draft when all the players with good scouting are gone.

The complaints about early bird aren't going to go away. If anything the new system may make it look worse. Kicker is it will be much more opaque, and we won't know for seasons what the outcome is.

(PS - I will admit some concern over the small pools going forward. The big pools provide much better random sampling which is why they are more resistant to the EBB. Smaller pools less so. I feel some of the misses in these pools are due to having 2 "great hit very good potential" guys on your list, but choosing the 12 pot over the 14 pot due to imperfect knowledge. That won't happen anymore. Will take a while to see if uncertain potential bars are enough to mitigate this).
Rock777
Joined: 09/21/2014
Posts: 9571

Haverhill Halflings
III.1

Broken Bat Baseball
Yep. I don't think the new draft is going to fix any of the old problems. Just going to create a few new ones. But we'll see.

With people, who make choices, being involved you have no idea where the biggest drop-offs will be.

That's a BS argument. You are assuming the first 100 drafters are dumber than the next 200? I would say that's a pretty poor assumption. You might have things work out different in one specific year, but on average there is going to be a bigger drop off after 300 picks then after the first 100.
Seca
Joined: 05/05/2014
Posts: 5194

Waterloo Dinosaurs
Legends

Broken Bat Baseball
Another new factor is pooling by position. These pools are big, so they should sample well. But ...

Pitchers. They were able to "hide" their potential better in the old draft. A +vel +mov +stam VG potential could easily be 12 pot or 14 pot. With the old draft you could have 2 of these guys on your board and could make the wrong choice. Won't happen anymore.

Anytime I have modelled EBB I've assumed a 100% hit rate (if a good player is on the board that player gets picked). In practice the old system hit rate was lower, especially for pitchers. With the new system hit rate is going to seem higher. Whether it actually is higher (uncertain potential bars) may be difficult to discern.


Previous Page | Show Page |